Photomatix Pro V5 Released

I wrote a very long piece to post here but realised it went so far off topic but still about HDR...I've removed it and started again.

I have got Photomatix 4.23 but will not be upgrading at this point as Photoshops merge to hdr does as much as I require it to, and since I only use HDR for around 2-3% of my shots, that's enough for me. But having used Photomatix from the very early stages (pre beta) and helped with its development, then continued to use it since I can say you wont find a better product for HDR or for making HDR artworks if that's your thing. And anyone with a basic understanding of how image manipulation, affects an image should have no problems using it.

Its very much a marmite thing and I personally don't appreciate the very ethereal looking artworks that HDR can produce, but I do respect the makers of such works as I know an awful lot of work can go into some of them. I prefer to spend less time post processing my shots anyway..and more time behind the camera. But having said that, there are one or two images on this topic that I quite like...so I must be softening towards it !

Steve...

 

I'm really struggling to take regular images of the garden, and plants in it, at this time of the year as the angle of the sun is so low the colours are getting distorted, or washed out.

Perhaps HDR would improve that for me?

 

I would suggest you read your cameras manual Kristen and learn how to set "Custom whitebalance" using a piece of white paper/card. That should help enormously with colour distortion/correction.

But before that I would ensure I was shooting with a good ISO for the light levels, and shoot manually, this time of year for everthing except very bright conditions gets an ISO of 200 or 400, I only use ISO 100 for bright sunny days in summer or fireworks etc.

Hope this helps.

Steve...

 

Thanks Steve. I've read about white balance, and have a camera that has plenty of fancy-functions, but not tried it. I'll experiment and report back, thanks.

Is upping the ISO to 400 going to make the picture more grainy, or won't it be that noticeable? My camera does automatic ISO selection (up to some number that is way faster than the fancy fast film I used to use for dawn animal shots ... higher than that a manual override is required), so hopefully that is already happening, but I'll check.

 

On todays cameras I would expect ISO400 to be relatively grain free, but 800, 1600 etc are in my opinion a no no.

Let me know how you get on.

Steve...

 

Looking at Dave's second lot of shots it confirms the fact that I really don't like this kind of image, sorry Dave!

The one in the cathedral was fine until my eyes wandered to the bottom part and HDR was more apparent. The second and third I didn't like at all and I realise now what I feel about this type of shot. They are neither painting nor photograph and the person that I am needs that definition, I don't like the mix of the two. I also think the pictures look as if they've had the 'life' drained out of them, no charisma if you like. If the originals were hanging in a gallery of mixed photographs and paintings, I would probably walk straight by them without a second glance. Harsh, yes, but I don't think you will ever convert me!

 

You're quite right of course Armandii, it wouldn't do for us all to like the same things.

 

​

 

I can't stand Marmite!

 

Strangely my son doesn't like Marmite but he'd eat Vegemite which was similar.

 

Or Darwin?