41 ms·
A 'poor persons' HDR can be done with ONE good photo. Load it into a decent photo editor, and adjust the exposure down two stops and save it, then repeat again
by Jaruzel 8y ago
A 'poor persons' HDR can be done with ONE good photo. Load it into a decent photo editor, and adjust the exposure down two stops and save it, then repeat again but up 2 stops. Now with the 3 copies, run it through a HDR generator. Not as good as bracketing directly in the camera, but can yield acceptable results.
- CWuestefeld 8y agoNo. This will give the visual effect of HDR (which many think is something to be avoided - HDR should be a tool, not a style), but does not increase the actual dynamic range.
- Jaruzel 8y agoTrue, but based on the fact that hardly anyone has actual HDR capable displays, the net effect of the output is mostly the same.
- sigi45 8y agoIt does. My RAW Images has a higher dynamic range than the final image shows without any HDR feature. You only put back what was already there and 'lost'.
- CWuestefeld 8y agoThat only works if you're shooting RAW. And even then all you've accomplished was a convoluted process to achieve the exact same thing you'd get in Lightroom by adjusting the Blacks and Whites sliders, and dragging the ranges horizontally in the histogram.
- sigi45 8y agoThat does not invalidate my original statement. I would argue that the end result should look slightly different. But you do use more of your dynamic range
- rocqua 8y agoReally, if you are going down that road I prefer manually blending the different exposures in Photoshop. 5 years ago, that is how I dealt with bracketed exposures as well. Back then HDR still had a very definite look which I really tried to avoid.