Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
unlike traditional hdr shots which look like post cards or paintings when pushed to hard ,,exposure fusion takes multiple exposures and naturally blends them in to a super exposure thats very natural and clean.
actually the image is quite flat and boring although quite extended on contrasty days in range. a little levels and covers and some local contrast adjustments and you get get some pretty nice photos
I found this website with some more info. I could be wrong, but doesn't seem much different from creating a blended exposure in Photoshop. Personally I like having shadows and dark corners in my pictures, although there are definitely situations where a blended exposure can be useful (e.g. interiors with bright sunlight streaming in through windows).
I found this website with some more info. I could be wrong, but doesn't seem much different from creating a blended exposure in Photoshop. Personally I like having shadows and dark corners in my pictures, although there are definitely situations where a blended exposure can be useful (e.g. interiors with bright sunlight streaming in through windows).
I believe the photomatix exposure fusion is pretty much the same as photoshop blend.
if you saw the origional of the above the best exposure had turquoise skys from blow out that day. if i darkened the skies the dark stuff was so noisy or gone in some. the 3 exposure blending was perfect for that mid-day shooting
I believe the photomatix exposure fusion is pretty much the same as photoshop blend.
Not sure how Photomatix works, but Photoshop doesn't have a single function to create a multi-exposure blend (other than the HDR function). It has 25 different blending modes, which, when coupled with opacity and layer masks, gives a huge range of choices to get just about any result. However, it is all a manual process, which can be time-consuming and/or trial-and-error. At a cursory glance, looks like the new exposure fusion software/features are more automated, making them easier and faster to use perhaps?
I use multi-exposure composites for astrophotography only, but I do it manually in PS. The image of M42 below is a composite of a stack of 2-sec exposures + a stack of 30-sec exposures, blended manually using Layer Masks. The 2-sec exposures capture the central core but miss all the wispy nebulosity around the edges, while the 30-sec exposures capture the nebulosity but blow out the central core:
The fusion mode of photomatix is a piece of cake, a few sliders and done. of course the image is as flat looking as can be. the real fun is in the editing after which brings the photo to life. i use capture nx2, im not a photoshop user although one day when i get lots of time ill start learning it.
Can you share the methods used to create these photos? They look much more natural than the typical HDR shots.
You can easily do it using PhotoMatix. The technique is just "blending" several images into one. The hard way is by using ND filters while taking the same photo several times with the camera on a tripod. Each photo is exposed differently with the aid of a ND filter.
But the easiest way is to take one RAW photo, and process this photo with PhotoShop (or Elements), and saving them to PhotoShop's ".dng" Each photo is processed so the first one is underexposed, the next one exposed a little more, and more, and more on the next photos. You can expose as many as you want. The next step is to use PhotoMatix to blend or fuse the photos into one. The result is a photo that shows a loth more shadow/light and color depth. Then you take this photo and re-process it with PhotoShop to make it look better.
Not sure how Photomatix works, but Photoshop doesn't have a single function to create a multi-exposure blend (other than the HDR function). It has 25 different blending modes, which, when coupled with opacity and layer masks, gives a huge range of choices to get just about any result. However, it is all a manual process, which can be time-consuming and/or trial-and-error. At a cursory glance, looks like the new exposure fusion software/features are more automated, making them easier and faster to use perhaps?
I use multi-exposure composites for astrophotography only, but I do it manually in PS. The image of M42 below is a composite of a stack of 2-sec exposures + a stack of 30-sec exposures, blended manually using Layer Masks. The 2-sec exposures capture the central core but miss all the wispy nebulosity around the edges, while the 30-sec exposures capture the nebulosity but blow out the central core:
You can use one of numerous "actions" sold by Fred Miranda and others to use with PhotoShop. Such actions save you a lot of work, since the action itself does the work for you.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
