Filed under: Analysis / Opinion, Software, Friday Favorite, Road Tested
Friday Favorite: Photomatix Pro
There are few times I have used software that really caused my jaw to drop. Photomatix Pro did just that. It's a Mac OS X utility that allows you to create what are called High Dynamic Range (HDR) images from separate digital exposures taken at different shutter speeds (exposure levels). These pictures are far more colorful and impressive in their tonal range and saturation.Many digital cameras have something called AEB, or Automatic Exposure Bracketing. You click the shutter once, and the camera takes 3 pictures instead of just one. In my case I usually shoot a normally exposed image, then one 2 stops under, and another one 2 stops over. If your camera doesn't have AEB you can do this manually.
Photomatix Pro combines the three exposures you've taken into one, and tone maps the image into a JPEG or TIFF that displays a really wide dynamic range. The result is often a stunning picture, with little loss in the shadowy areas, and no blown-out highlights. It's hard to do if you are shooting people because they will move between the 3 exposures, but works great with landscapes. A tripod is recommended, but I've done just fine handheld and Photomatix Pro will automatically line up (register) the 3 images.
Words can't describe the difference, so I've included a few examples to look at. There are other Mac apps that do similar things, but I've had the best luck with Photomatix Pro. They also make a Photoshop plug-in and one for Aperture, but I think the full program is the best. Newer versions of Photoshop also support the creation of these HDR images, but the results are not as spectacular in my view. There is also a free, basic version of the program that lets you combine 2 images, but it is simply not as effective.
You can search for a lot of information on HDR photography on the web. I have found this site to be very good, and it reviews the different software that is available. It's very easy to overdo the look of HDR images, and Photomatix Pro gives you lots of control. You can make your images really good, or outlandish. The control is in the hands of the photographer. To many, HDR will be old hat, but a lot of photographers haven't tried it, and will be pleasantly shocked at the results.
Since you can download Photomatix Pro for free, if you are serious about digital imaging, I'd give it a tryout. If you buy the full version it is US$99.00.
Here are some examples of how HDR imaging works. Of course these images are reduced in quality and resolution, so they only hint at the differences.
![TUAW [Cafepress]](http://www.blogsmithmedia.com/www.tuaw.com/media/tuaw-cafepress-promo.png)
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 2)
Ryan said 3:57PM on 6-05-2009
Actually, you vary the shutter speed, not the f-stop. Varying the f-stop would change the depth of field (which makes each exposure have a much different perspective) which would break the HDR process.
Reply
Bob said 3:47PM on 6-05-2009
I don't think HDR uses photos with different f-stops, just ramping up and down the exposure adjustment that many digital cameras have. Wouldn't changing the f-stop also pretty dramatically change the image? Just my two-cents...
Reply
Jon Niola said 3:59PM on 6-05-2009
Bob is correct. Different f-stops would mean different depths-of-field. Smaller apertures like f/8 would have more of a scene in focus than a larger aperture like f/4.
If you try to make an HDR with multiple images at different f-stops you would get a pretty blurry image as different depths-of-field would be merged.
Typically the only thing that changes in a bracketed HDR is the exposure bias (or EV on some cameras like Nikon) - this is the amount of bias in over or under-exposure in a given capture.
imjeffro said 4:12PM on 6-05-2009
Jon, adjusting the 'exposure bias' is adjusting the shutter speed in aperture-priority mode and in most full-Program modes (though Program modes vary from camera to camera). In Shutter-priority mode adjusting the EV will change the aperture (f-stop).
When creating an HDR image you would want only the shutter speed to change (keep aperture consistent) as you and others have already said.
Johann1356 said 7:19PM on 6-06-2009
Most guides tell you to lock the aperture for that reason.
Bertil Holmberg said 4:01PM on 6-05-2009
The new Pentax DSLR K-7 will do this in the camera. A dedicated program will most probably give superior results but it will still be interesting to see what this promising camera can do with HDR.
Reply
balls said 4:04PM on 6-05-2009
HDR/Tone Mapped images are fun to play with, but they're pretty time consuming--even with Photomatix, and the end result, while to many people looks good, eventually as you say, gets to be old hat.
The big problem with these images is that they aren't close to being photorealistic, screaming "PCHOPED"
It's a fun effect for one or two images, but I turn my nose at people who are one-trick hdr image ponies.
Reply
Will said 4:10PM on 6-05-2009
HDR images don't have to be crazy over the top, you can actually use photomatix to get some very realistic looking images.
balls said 4:16PM on 6-05-2009
You're right Will. The HDR/Tone Mapped images that are photorealistic, do look good.
Unfortunately this technique is easy to abuse, and many people do so (just look at the gallery images for this post)
Stephen Lang said 5:07PM on 6-05-2009
Those one-trick hdr image ponies...harruummpphhh!!!
CaptSaltyJack said 4:40PM on 6-05-2009
Er, no offense, but those example shots don't look so hot. The "before" photos look much nicer. You've got that "halo" effect surrounding the bushes in one of those photos, e.g., which is a tell-tale sign of poor use of HDR.
Play with the settings a LOT, get rid of that halo edge effect. I tend to use HDR for more realistic (rather than artistic) purposes. A good example is shooting building interiors with windows. Typically you either get an overexposed window or an underexposed interior. Using HDR you can see outside the window AND inside the room.
Reply
Joseph said 4:54PM on 6-05-2009
why not just use a feathered mask to bring the window back in? no need to HDR. If you can isolate your exposures easily, like a landscape sunset, then there is no real reason to HDR. it is a shortcut for making tedious masks or artistic effects.
Stephen Lang said 5:11PM on 6-05-2009
You can only do so much with a single image due to poor dynamic range of most digital cameras (that is, if I'm reading your reply right.) You may blow out the highlights or lose shadow detail, or both, in just a single image.
balls said 5:17PM on 6-05-2009
@Stephan Lang: I think what Joeseph means is that you can use multiple exposures as layers, and use masks to isolate the portion of each image.
And, if thats what he's saying, I agree, taking mutltiple exposures, layering them, and using masks (at least imo) is much faster than dicking with HDR's and Tone Mapping to get a more realistic image.
You'd also be suprised at how much shadow and light data you can pull from a single properly exposed RAW image. Rawprocess the image 3 different times, and try it.
Mike said 5:29PM on 6-05-2009
Some of my weak/decent HDR attempts..
Reply
Mike said 5:31PM on 6-05-2009
so i guess i cant post links?
does this work now?
http://www.flickr.com/photos/25479668@N00/sets/72157614888407112/
Andrew C said 1:27AM on 6-06-2009
My opinion is that HRD images more often than not, have a fake look about them. The shadows and highlights appear to me to have been too heavily edited. Maybe that's what's intended, I just prefer a more natural looking result.
Reply
Brent Schmidt said 2:21AM on 6-06-2009
I find Dynamic HDR (pc + mac) a better (or, easier) program for this...
http://www.mediachance.com/hdri/
and some of my images...
http://www.flickr.com/photos/brentschmidt/sets/72157617370174131/
Reply
glaurent said 6:12AM on 6-06-2009
I've also been using Hydra, gives pretty good results with no hassle - http://www.creaceed.com/hydra/ . And it has an Aperture plugin too.
Reply
Rob said 4:18PM on 6-06-2009
There's far, far, far more that can be done with HDR than these examples; I and my collaborator just published in Paleontological Electronica a quick survey paper of how to use the technique in paleo collections, and we have another paper submitted elsewhere on how to use it for much, much superior fine detail analysis for microscopic images. Currently, we get much better results assembling HDRs using FDRTools, not Photomatix Pro, although the tonemapping features of Photomatix are, usually, better than FDRTools. We're still living in hope that, one day, Hydra doesn't suck rocks, but so far, no dice.
Reply