As an experiment today, I shot some photo triplets from Baker Road outside Sherwood. For each view, I bracketed two stops in each direction. One of them had a horse that conveniently posed, motionless, through all three shots. Here are the original shots, the last of which is the best compromise between blowing out highlights on the horse, showing the mountain's snow, and making detail visible in the valley trees (you can click on the images for larger views):
I ran the images through a fresh trial version of Photomatix (mentioned in my previous posting), a program that derives a High Dyanamic Range image from the multiple exposures, then maps the tones to what can be rendered on a screen or print, yet preserving details in all luminosities. Here is the result:
My first response was, "Wow!" The subtle details in the horse's coloration and the valley trees have been preserved, yet the mountain snow and clouds are beautiful in the background. Here is a final cropped view:
I'm going to have to re-think my whole approach to high-contrast scenes, knowing this technology exists.
1 comment:
Indeed, there is a controversy in the HDR forums about why the Photomatix results tend to be preferred to those of other, competing products. At face value, the results are often less "natural," i.e. they have more dramatic effect than a strict scientific realistic portrayal. Yet they get more votes. I think I know why. When we observe a mountain scene, a sunset, or other high-contrast vista, our human psychology gets into the act. We see details in the clouds, in the disk of the sun, and the lapping of waves at the beach. It feels simultaneous, but it's really our eyes flitting from section to section of the scene. In a Photomatix rendering, every section we "flit" to has the maximum attractiveness. Psychologically, it "feels" better. IMHO.
Post a Comment