>HDR
Hi /p/ I am curious about HDR and getting the best results
Is it better to merge RAW files or jpgs?
Raw files are obviously more flexible than jpgs but they are also flat and pretty lifeless
On the other hand.. jpgs are not as flexible and processing them can be destructive but they are also are more contrasty with punchier colors (I also shoot Fuji and the film simulations are fantastic)
HOWEVER, when you merge to HDR the resulting file can be up to a 32bit tiff that I am assuming holds all the information of all the files merged BUT ALSO the file created depends directly on the files merged (for example, RAW files merged will still create a more dull looking image)
What I have also noticed is, the merged photos seem to average the flexbility between the file across all the files merged, by this I mean... Even if you merge a highly under exposed image (that retains highlights) it does not mean that you will retain ALL the highlight detail in the HDR file..
Curious to know how others approach this, thanks.
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Camera Software Photographer Trey Ratcliff and http://www.StuckInCustoms.com Image-Specific Properties:
>>2848279
no idea about HDR, but im curious as to why you say raw files are flat and lifeless?
>>2848281
Because they are? I understand that they are meant to be processed but my question related directly to using the files files vs jpg files for merging to HDR
>>2848282
>because they are
are you fucking 12? you obviously know more than me so you can atleast answer my question better than that. jesus.
give me a direct comparison anon, i dont believe you one bit
>>2848279
RAW files are not flat and lifeless. They are the raw data from your camera's sensor saved into a file. If they're flat and lifeless, it's because you processed them that way. You *can* turn the RAW files into something like the Fuji JPEGs with adequate skill, and I'd highly recommend doing so for stacking exposures. So basically, make the RAW files into appropriate TIFFs or something (with as much contrast as you desire) and then stack those.
>>2848290
>i dont believe you one bit
Obvious troll thread.
>>2848318
>Uses HDR for Real Estate
Amateur detected, lrn2lighting
>>2848318
>5 stops
Wow, this is rather outdated. Good post though.
>>2848290
A raw file is technically not anything visual at all, because it's just a long string of data. Your raw converter then reads that data and builds a preview image out of it. If your preview image contains all of the information available in the raw, then it has very low contrast and saturation because there is so much range in a raw file that minor transitions from sort of light to a little more light are very slight and subtle compared against the total range of the image, and there are no adjustments done to the data to enhance those transitions.
Here's a representation of the raw data without enhancement
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Image-Specific Properties: Horizontal Resolution 300 dpi Vertical Resolution 300 dpi Color Space Information sRGB
>>2848376
And here is my "holy shit I'm on vacation so I'm a little high" edit.
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Image-Specific Properties: Horizontal Resolution 300 dpi Vertical Resolution 300 dpi Color Space Information sRGB
>>2848318
>>2848332
These graphs are a bit wrong and outdated. The human eye does have about 24 stops of adaptive DR, but only around 7 stops on a static subject (such as a television screen). This is why TV makers typically try to achieve higher dynamic range through deeper blacks and not necessarily high brightness, as too high a difference between the two can lead to eye strain, since the eye can't utilize brightness adaptation. Also why it's recommended to watch TV in a lit room or use a backlight.
The other two bars are wrong because film can vary greatly based on type, anywhere between 7~20 stops, and digital cameras have achieved the point of being able to record 13~15 stops of light, even Canon cameras can do 12+ stops now. The 5 stops of "most" cameras is just wrong, as even your typical smartphone may capture up to 8 stops (limited by 8-bit encoding of JPEG files).
>>2848419
I keep seeing this popping up... Is it a joke, or a new meme? Or are you just going around asking for raws a lot with a ridiculous email address?
>>2848478
Okay, I'll send it then.
You'll get to see the wonder that was Lightroom's rendering of RAF file detail a couple of years ago.
I auto-converted to DNG on import back then, so the detail rendering baked into the file, and since it's not an RAF anymore, the updated and much improved way that LR handles the raws doesn't apply.
>>2848492
Bullshit. Same data. Change the process version in the camera calibration tab, and it should be the same thing as importing the RAF right now.
>>2848508
I did it 2014, and the most up to date "process" is 2012.
>>2848279
>I am curious about HDR
stop right there and rethink your life
>>2848279
>Depending on in camera jpg conversion and auto filter instead of properly developing your picture in post
Good God you Fujii fags are abysmal.
>>2848553
Can't you just stay in the Charlie thread? How do we quarantine you...
>>2848279
The point of HDR is to capture the whole range of tones and colors in the scene, so by definition, you want a file that has a huge range in it, which would be raw. Once you're adding "punch and contrast" you're removing that range, and defeating the purpose.
Ideally, you'd bracket your shots, get all your raws, merge them into a tiff, and then add your processing.
>>2848582
>bat shit crazy bout 'hdr'
>favorite 'hdr photographer'
Merge TIFFs. Batch edit the raw files to retain the highlight and shadow detail and batch export to 16 bit or greater TIFF. Edit for ""punch"" afterwards.
>>2848528
Some shots are completely impossible on Digital or 35mm film without HDR.
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Camera Software Adobe Photoshop CC 2015 (Windows) Image-Specific Properties: Image Orientation Top, Left-Hand Horizontal Resolution 300 dpi Vertical Resolution 300 dpi Image Created 2016:05:09 01:40:22 Color Space Information sRGB Image Width 1052 Image Height 700
