Mundu

Vardas

Atsakymas: [citata=Komando]Greetings from a fellow rider ('05 Gold Wing) and peairssfonol photographer who started in this industry at age 6 doing darkroom work (well learning as an apprentice) in my dad's photography business. I've been at it now for 54 years and teach HDR workshops throughout the Western States. I have five books behind me (my photography illustrating them) and am now working on a project of love: Two Weeks On The Mother Road (Route 66 for those too young to remember how the road received its name). Nick, I am covering the entire road (California to Chicago since I moved from Chicago (thankfully) in 1986) from the saddle of my 2005, 35th Anniversary, Honda Gold Wing (just put a heated Russell Saddle on in August).Into the fray Nick, your thoughts and comments are accurate on 99.9% of the points; slightly off on one, just one which is a purely technical issue. Yet, is is an important one. Lauren will also discover why her comment about seeing and HDR image in Life's 2/27/1950 image is incorrect from a very important, and purely technical, aspect.Why do I make my bold statement? First of all, HDR imaging as a technique is developed in an MIT mathematics lab for the film industry in 1982 every book on HDR imaging I have researched (more than 50 of them), as well as a few of the journal articles published in the scientific literature, bear this out. Lauren, what you see in the Life issue of 2/27/50 is a well-woked, properly exposed, 4X5 negative processed in the darkroom using Ansel Adam's Zone System (the premier darkroom and exposure technique then as well as now). By the way, did you know when you have your internal light meters set for the full scene on the digital cameras of today the camera's computer automatically uses the Zone System as its exposure guide?Nick, you are particularly correct in your statement concerning what we see today as being stylistic. This is the result of the tone-mapping (the darkroom processing) and any Photoshop (or other application) used after the tone-mapping procedure to finalize the print. No question about it a lot, and I mean a LOT of people overuse the tone-mapping and post processing to give the final, tone-mapped image, the cartoonish, over-the-top, often surrealistic look we have often come to recognize (many hate) as an HDR image.Yes, HDR does stand for High Dynamic Range; However, HDR is NOT the final output the final output is actually an LDR image (Low Dynamic Range) comparable to transparency film of the analog years. (An HDR file [.rad; .hdr] is 32 bit while a tif, dng, psd file is at most 16 bit and more typically 8-bit. JPG files and other variations such as PNG are typically 8-bit image files. This does not change the look of the output from an HDR image capture; it only makes the image printable on today's printers (home and lab).I saw a comment in an article (I do not remember the journal at this time I think it was Outdoor Photographer as it has been a few months) saying the images we see in print and which utilized HDR imaging capture technique were more High Definition than HDR. This is close to what Lauren calls her EDR output, and not a bad description at all, Lauren.Technically, a single frame capture is NOT an HDR image. It may very well be a tone-mapped image if you ran it through a camera raw processor such as Photomatix Pro 4 (or another application similar) and tone-mapped the image to pull out the shadows, tone down the blown out highs, etc. It is physically, and mathematically, impossible to have an HDR capture in today's DSLRs (or the new 4/3 or micro 4/3 cameras) without a multi-frame capture which captures the full 23 Exposure Values the human eye sees. The best camera on the market for Dynamic Range used to be the Fuji S5Pro. Top end Nikon, Canon, Sigma, Sony, and others, DSLRs of today capture about 12 to 15 Exposure values at BEST. The medium format cameras do no better.To be accurate within the industry, and amongst ourselves, it is important to keep the terminology, and the science, of the craft accurate. Thusly, unless you are physically taking a multi-frame capture of a scene you do NOT, technically, have an HDR image.Q.E.D.Respectfully,Richard S Hockett, MBA, DTMSunRidge Photo[/citata]Apsaugos kodas