HDR on an antique gasoline engine
I’m not a big fan of HDR because most people (all except one that I’m aware of) go way overboard with it. Most people seem to use HDR for landscapes, which I don’t like. Using terminology created to describe the overboard effect, the pictures look “overcooked.”
That doesn’t mean that I’m not exploring the ins and outs of HDR to see if I might like its effect, or some of its effects, in areas other than landscapes. Or possibly being a little less extreme in using its effects on landscapes.
One subject matter that I have always believed could benefit from HDR is antiques, especially machinery. As I was cataloging pictures this morning, I found two slightly different exposures of an antique gasoline engine:
I didn’t think they would be different enough to do anything with using HDR, not to mention the fact that usually you want at least three different exposures for HDR. However, I took those two exposures to Photoshop CS6 and asked it to use its “Merge to HDR Pro” function to give me something a little more colorful, sharper, etc. After playing around for a while with the settings in HDR Pro, here’s what I got that I did like:
I think the HDR photo shows the age of the old engine better than the two original photos.
Looking for real estate services in San Diego County?
I can highly recommend
James Frimmer, Realtor
Century 21 Award, DRE #01458572
If you’re looking for a home inspector,
I recommend Russel Ray — that’s me!
Posted on October 2, 2012, in Adobe, Digital photo editing, How I Did It, Manmade, Photos and tagged antique gasoline engine photos, HDR photos. Bookmark the permalink. 18 Comments.
I agree.
Makes a big difference. I like it.
I must be a purist because I preferred the original. I use editing to make images closer to what the eye sees. Maybe I haven’t been doing photography long enough to feel the need to get creative with the editing. Thanks for showing us the images. I like the learning you provide.
Exactly! Which is what I did with the HDR. The flat images that come out of the camera, like the first two, aren’t anywhere near what my eye saw. The HDR is much, much closer. This was a very beautiful antique gasoline engine, and when I got home and saw the pictures, I was soooooooooooo disappointed. That’s when I decided that maybe there really is something to HDR that I can work with.
Thanks for the clarification. I thought your souped up the engine – so to speak, but you actually made it look more authentic. Great!
I agree – the results of your ‘tweaking’ do enhance the look of age on this photo … love the seal of approval too! =D
What was the exposure bias on the originals? they look very similar to each other and perhaps thats why you didn’t get as much dynamic range in the final output… which I think is slightly oversaturated.
I’m not blindly pro-HDR but in this case I would say its the better one.
There was only a 3/4 stop difference. I got more dynamic range than I wanted, so I tweaked it some to bring it back to what I remember seeing.
hmmmmm… very interesting!! I wouldn’t think 3/4 would be enough to get too much dynamic range… I would’ve guessed you at least need 2 stop difference.
What do I know then… I’m just an amateur… thank god for the full time job
lol
Everyone recommends a minimum 1-stop difference but using a minimum of three photos. Notice that I only have two. For landscapes, many people recommend a 2-stop difference with a minimum of three photos or a 1-stop difference using five photos.
I don’t go out shooting with the purpose of coming home and making everything into HDR, so I certainly will never have five photos of the same thing!…………..lol
What I used to do is set my camera to AEB so its always taking -2,0,+2… when I got home I deleted the extras for the shots I didn’t want to HDR… now its a much more thought out process.
BTW, who is the HDR photographer that produces realistic images? Would be nice to see what you consider realistic and you might as well give the chap some pingback love
lol
I tried doing exactly that but since I take pictures mostly of wildlife, it was a waste of effort.
Dare I say that I like your use of HDR better than anyone I’ve come across? Now don’t go gettin’ a big head on me…………lol
oh thats funny… no worries, it won’t get to my head… but its very flattering to hear… thanks bud
Big difference, Russel. I’m not all that learned when it comes to photography; what is HDR?
Blessings ~ Maxi
High Dynamic Range. The human eye sees a much wider range of contrast and colors than cameras do. HDR offers a way for a modified photo to present a greater dynamic range that is much closers to what the eye sees.
A great way to understand this is to go out when the sun is setting on the horizon. Find a lot of buildings with the sun behind them. Your eyes will see what’s in the shadows of those buildings. However, if you take a picture, when you get home you find that you have a monster sun and black buildings, silhouettes. HDR allows you to take a normal picture, an underexposed picture (to bring the brightness of the sun down), and an overexposed picture (to bring out the detail in the shadows). When you combine those three pictures, you get a resulting image much closer to what your eyes saw.
Pingback: HDR Tutorial – Church Web by Ryan McGinnis | HDR Tutorial
Pingback: Photoshop HDR Tutorial by Photoshopcafe | HDR Tutorial
Pingback: Faking HDR by TutsPlus and By James Davies | HDR Tutorial