HDR pictures of cars!

"HDR stands for High Dynamic Range or HDRI - High Dynamic Range Imaging. This method was developed to produce a high dynamic range image from several different photographs ( usually three - with high exposure, low exposure and standard exposure) and usually merging them in Adobe Photoshop or any other image processing software for tone-mapping. HDR is becoming more and more popular with its stunning magical and surreal effects."

linkity to the cars :yumyum:

http://www.1stwebdesigner.com/inspiration/40-really-stunning-hdr-car-photos-resources-and-tutorials/

 

wow, nice...first time seeing that.

It'll be great for big posters.

 

So cool!

 

I'm definitely going to try that on some of mine. Many of those pictures look computer-rendered, straight out of Gran Turismo 4 or 5.

 

oh no...

that link does not show the proper use of tone mapped images.
its become some huge fad to produce photos with that overprocessed look. to get a look like that you really dont need HDR... and its dissapointing to see that people are now starting to think that a hdr photo is supposed to look like that when done right.

that form of editing was created to create clear images... not dirty gross entry level quality photos. i think it was talked about already on this forum too.

if its done right it should be hard to tell that tone mapping was used at all other than looking at the where the light is coming from.

less Halo's, not gritty/drity, time taken to actually make it look good...

 

these are also good examples to look at. see how clear they are?








a rule of thumb is to not use it unless the photo you are taking calls for such editing. idk i guess i just like to see things done the right way before people jump on the bandwagon of photostyles. this nasty poorly done HDR fad is the next "tuner tilt style"

 

Meh, I am going to have to respectfully disagree with holster and russ. One of the biggest reasons I love making HDR photos is because I can adjust them how I like them. In the end, it's all different 'art' so to speak. I just tend to lean towards whatever is pleasing to my eye...

 

yea some of those are "fake" HDR interpolated from 1 RAW image. I will keep my mouth shut about what I think of where the HDR trend is moving - especially when it comes to car forums.

 

good lord it is like 1992 all over again when people discovered the "glowing edges" filter.

+1. Maybe some of the images are kind of cool, but it shouldn't be called HDR.

 

I'm not feeling most of the pics from that link Rusty, they make my chest feel heavy... I'm no photographer so i guess I can't really say much more than that.

 

i see your guys concerns with the actions pictures, i cant think of a way to get at least 3 different exposure shots on a rally car, so those are probably CGI, and lots of it. either way some of them look cool, (the non cartuneish ones)

also this twittered link was cool and bounced to the car one from it.

http://www.online-photoshoptutorials.com/2008/10/17-of-the-most-visually-beautiful-hdr-images.html

 

the motion shots are done by taking 1 RAW image and interpolating multiple exposures out of it.

 

is that hard to do? i really have no experience with digital editing. only good old 35mm and a few good lenses.... :yumyum:

 

No, It's easy to do.
Essentially one uses a raw image and saves the file with multiple exposure settings. Then combines them to make an HDR. It's not really a true hdr since if there is no data (black) or blown out(White) PS cannot create data. I've done it both ways and had decent results with either.

*edit, The above applies to photos although I'm sure the process is similar for video.

One question I have is, does photmatrix have messed up tone mapping defaults or what. The majority of the cartoonish HDRs are coming out of photomatrix. Maybe photomatrix is the choice hdr newb tool. Similar to how everyone and their momma likes to put lens flare on everything using PS.

 

by no means do i think that it cant be considered a creative way to edit a photo. BUT! when the bandwagoners all jump on in ignorance to what its origional purpose is, discredits and makes tonemaping sloppy.

my main grudge is that now everyone and their grandma is doing these so called "good HDR" images and claiming to be something special when all they are doing is copying what they saw on the internet. most people are doing it because someone els did it. they dont even understand where it came from and why.

its like the guy who posts a thread about "what bodykit, wheels and stickers should i put on my car" he is only asking because he wants to be cool and not express his own self through his car. thus making him a wanabe and a bandwagoner poser.

my point is that i think before people start to jump on the photo wagon, they should at least try to do things the origional way to gain a respect for the techincal side of the craft. their own style will improve in legitimacy and recognition.

 

yes. photomaitx is a very simple program that has defaults set to show what is being done when the photos are merged together. the first photo i posted was proscessed with photomatix and then brought into photoshop to reduce the distracting halo affect that HDR brings. the majority of established photographers will tell you that halos are distracting and can ruin the subject of an image.

i get the feeling that most people using photomatix think that the default settings are supposed to be like that for each image. but thats even more newbie to put a batch of exposures into the program and not even tweak the settings to make it look clearer. its as if nobody is really even trying to create something with any skill level. once again they are just creating something that they dont understand themselves.

 

here is one of my car i did

 

I definitely like the less processed or "real" HDR pictures better. But the cartoony pics have there place also. I just don't enjoy them as much cause they look fake and therefor, inferior IMO