I have looked at so many poor HDR examples where someone must have thought the goal of HDR was to lighten up those shadows to be as bright as they could possibly make them.īut on the other hand, if the goal is to make something cartoonish, I actually like some of those that I see.Īnd I also find that many HDR images don't really need to be HDR as the camera has sufficient dynamic range that one image can give you what you need. Good HDR is limits lighting such that what is used seems real and matches expectations on the available light and its direction. Good HDR/Tonemapping is when the viewer doesn't know is has been applied.Įxactly!!! If an image looks like it is HDR, then I also am put off.
If I look at a Tonemapped images and the first thing I notice are shadows that are to light I'm instantly put off. IMHO there too much of a tendency to opening up the shadows way beyond what is 'believable'. Our eyes and brain compensate for the dark shadows.
Just an observation of recent years looking at and processing HDR/Tonmapping files.
DARKTABLE HDR SOFTWARE
Don't overlook the variations between software results being a result of 'poor' capture. Keep in mind that 'good' HDR/Tonemapping starts with good capture.
0 kommentar(er)
