Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

HDR software

Expand Messages
  • Ingemar Bergmark
    What do you guys think of this software? http://www.mediachance.com/hdri/index.html Regards, Ingemar Bergmark http://panoramas.bergmark.com
    Message 1 of 19 , Nov 3, 2007
    • 0 Attachment
      What do you guys think of this software?
      http://www.mediachance.com/hdri/index.html

      Regards,
      Ingemar Bergmark
      http://panoramas.bergmark.com
    • Carel
      Media Chance has some interesting programs, such as Real Draw Pro, which mixes vector and bitmap editing in one environment. I think this is worth a try,
      Message 2 of 19 , Nov 5, 2007
      • 0 Attachment
        Media Chance has some interesting programs, such as Real Draw Pro, which
        mixes vector and bitmap editing in one environment. I think this is worth a
        try, especially the anti ghosting by sloppy masking looks promising.


        Ingemar Bergmark wrote:
        >
        > What do you guys think of this software?
        > http://www.mediachance.com/hdri/index.html
        >
        > Regards,
        > Ingemar Bergmark
        > http://panoramas.bergmark.com
        >
        >
        >

        --
        View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/HDR-software-tf4745543.html#a13593511
        Sent from the PanoToolsNG mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
      • Carel
        Media Chance has some interesting programs, such as Real Draw Pro, which mixes vector and bitmap editing in one environment. I think this is worth a try,
        Message 3 of 19 , Nov 5, 2007
        • 0 Attachment
          Media Chance has some interesting programs, such as Real Draw Pro, which
          mixes vector and bitmap editing in one environment. I think this is worth a
          try, especially the anti ghosting by sloppy masking looks promising, as does
          "pin warping" and "match color".


          Ingemar Bergmark wrote:
          >
          > What do you guys think of this software?
          > http://www.mediachance.com/hdri/index.html
          >
          > Regards,
          > Ingemar Bergmark
          > http://panoramas.bergmark.com
          >
          >
          >

          --
          View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/HDR-software-tf4745543.html#a13593511
          Sent from the PanoToolsNG mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
        • gabriel s
          I tried Enhance and like the result, the picture is more luminous Gabriel Carel wrote: Media Chance has some interesting programs,
          Message 4 of 19 , Nov 5, 2007
          • 0 Attachment
            I tried "Enhance" and like the result, the picture is more "luminous"
            Gabriel

            Carel <cs@...> wrote:
            Media Chance has some interesting programs, such as Real Draw Pro, which
            mixes vector and bitmap editing in one environment. I think this is worth a
            try, especially the anti ghosting by sloppy masking looks promising, as does
            "pin warping" and "match color".

            Ingemar Bergmark wrote:
            >
            > What do you guys think of this software?
            > http://www.mediachance.com/hdri/index.html
            >
            > Regards,
            > Ingemar Bergmark
            > http://panoramas.bergmark.com
            >
            >
            >

            --
            View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/HDR-software-tf4745543.html#a13593511
            Sent from the PanoToolsNG mailing list archive at Nabble.com.





            __________________________________________________
            Do You Yahoo!?
            Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
            http://mail.yahoo.com

            [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
          • Carel
            ... I tried Dynamic Photo HDR from MediaChance tonight. The antighosting works very well. The best anti-ghosting method of all the HDR programs I have tried
            Message 5 of 19 , Nov 5, 2007
            • 0 Attachment
              Ingemar Bergmark wrote:
              >
              > What do you guys think of this software?
              > http://www.mediachance.com/hdri/index.html
              >
              > Regards,
              > Ingemar Bergmark
              > http://panoramas.bergmark.com
              >
              >

              I tried "Dynamic Photo HDR" from MediaChance tonight. The antighosting works
              very well. The best anti-ghosting method of all the HDR programs I have
              tried so far. But it runs out of memory when tonemapping a 6600x3300 image
              and also does not do 360 degrees yet. Back to FDRTools.

              Carel
              --
              View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/HDR-software-tf4745543.html#a13601391
              Sent from the PanoToolsNG mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
            • Ken Warner
              Have you tried and compared other HDR software and found that FDRTools is -- I don t want to say best -- but FDRTools fits your needs and workflow better? Just
              Message 6 of 19 , Nov 6, 2007
              • 0 Attachment
                Have you tried and compared other HDR software and found
                that FDRTools is -- I don't want to say best -- but FDRTools
                fits your needs and workflow better?

                Just wondering. I'm trying to figure out which HDR software
                should be considered first. THere's a bunch...

                Carel wrote:
                >
                > Ingemar Bergmark wrote:
                >
                >>What do you guys think of this software?
                >>http://www.mediachance.com/hdri/index.html
                >>
                >>Regards,
                >>Ingemar Bergmark
                >>http://panoramas.bergmark.com
                >>
                >>
                >
                >
                > I tried "Dynamic Photo HDR" from MediaChance tonight. The antighosting works
                > very well. The best anti-ghosting method of all the HDR programs I have
                > tried so far. But it runs out of memory when tonemapping a 6600x3300 image
                > and also does not do 360 degrees yet. Back to FDRTools.
                >
                > Carel
              • Carel
                ... Hi Ken, The panotools Wiki has a nice comparison spreadsheet: http://wiki.panotools.org/HDR_Software_overview I have tried almost all, except Photogenics
                Message 7 of 19 , Nov 6, 2007
                • 0 Attachment
                  Ken Warner-2 wrote:
                  >
                  > Have you tried and compared other HDR software and found
                  > that FDRTools is -- I don't want to say best -- but FDRTools
                  > fits your needs and workflow better?
                  >
                  > Just wondering. I'm trying to figure out which HDR software
                  > should be considered first. THere's a bunch...
                  >
                  >

                  Hi Ken,

                  The panotools Wiki has a nice comparison spreadsheet:
                  http://wiki.panotools.org/HDR_Software_overview

                  I have tried almost all, except Photogenics (too expensive) and pfsTools
                  (could not figure out how to install). I can only get Photomatix to work in
                  batch mode, which makes it un-usable because you cant see what you are
                  doing. Photomatix's anti-ghosting is also rather primitive. With
                  Picturenaut, which is a current favorite of many on this list, I cant keep
                  the highlights from blowing out (maybe just user error on my part). FDRTools
                  gives me by far the best results and also gives plenty of options to
                  interactively change the settings. That makes it a bit harder to learn.
                  FDRTools has a method called "separation", where one can influence the
                  amount of contribution of each bracketed shot to the final hdr. This helps a
                  lot to minimize ghosting, but is not perfect. The masking method in Dynamic
                  Photo HDR makes a lot more sense, because you only influence the area where
                  ghosting takes place. But otherwise, DPHDR needs more development before it
                  becomes useful. For tricky ghosting, one could save the HDR in DPHDR and
                  then tonemap in FDRTools.

                  Hope this helped you to explore HDR further,

                  Carel Struycken

                  --
                  View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/HDR-software-tf4745543.html#a13612104
                  Sent from the PanoToolsNG mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
                • Ken Warner
                  Yes, thanks. Good summary of HDR software. I ll checkout the wiki... Ken
                  Message 8 of 19 , Nov 6, 2007
                  • 0 Attachment
                    Yes, thanks. Good summary of HDR software.

                    I'll checkout the wiki...

                    Ken

                    Carel wrote:
                    >
                    >
                    > Ken Warner-2 wrote:
                    >
                    >>Have you tried and compared other HDR software and found
                    >>that FDRTools is -- I don't want to say best -- but FDRTools
                    >>fits your needs and workflow better?
                    >>
                    >>Just wondering. I'm trying to figure out which HDR software
                    >>should be considered first. THere's a bunch...
                    >>
                    >>
                    >
                    >
                    > Hi Ken,
                    >
                    > The panotools Wiki has a nice comparison spreadsheet:
                    > http://wiki.panotools.org/HDR_Software_overview
                    >
                    > I have tried almost all, except Photogenics (too expensive) and pfsTools
                    > (could not figure out how to install). I can only get Photomatix to work in
                    > batch mode, which makes it un-usable because you cant see what you are
                    > doing. Photomatix's anti-ghosting is also rather primitive. With
                    > Picturenaut, which is a current favorite of many on this list, I cant keep
                    > the highlights from blowing out (maybe just user error on my part). FDRTools
                    > gives me by far the best results and also gives plenty of options to
                    > interactively change the settings. That makes it a bit harder to learn.
                    > FDRTools has a method called "separation", where one can influence the
                    > amount of contribution of each bracketed shot to the final hdr. This helps a
                    > lot to minimize ghosting, but is not perfect. The masking method in Dynamic
                    > Photo HDR makes a lot more sense, because you only influence the area where
                    > ghosting takes place. But otherwise, DPHDR needs more development before it
                    > becomes useful. For tricky ghosting, one could save the HDR in DPHDR and
                    > then tonemap in FDRTools.
                    >
                    > Hope this helped you to explore HDR further,
                    >
                    > Carel Struycken
                    >
                  • panovrx
                    I had a look at Dynamic-Photo HDR last night and it has had some interesting improvements since it was last discussed. Now it supports 360 blending and has
                    Message 9 of 19 , Aug 21, 2008
                    • 0 Attachment
                      I had a look at Dynamic-Photo HDR last night and it has had some
                      interesting improvements since it was last discussed. Now it supports
                      360 blending and has added a very Enfuse-like "Photographic" tone
                      mapping setting. It can create "pseudo-HDR" tone mapping tweaking of
                      single RAW files including the latest NEF and CR2. I think this is
                      its most interesting feature and why I bought it. Its batch
                      processing is still rather rudimentary.

                      Peter Murphy
                      http://www.mediavr.com/blog

                      --- In PanoToolsNG@yahoogroups.com, "Ingemar Bergmark" <ingemar@...>
                      wrote:
                      >
                      > What do you guys think of this software?
                      > http://www.mediachance.com/hdri/index.html
                      >
                      > Regards,
                      > Ingemar Bergmark
                      > http://panoramas.bergmark.com
                      >
                    • Lars O. Grobe
                      Hi! ... What they write on the first page of the website seams to be a little misleading. The intention to capture HDR too avoid disappointments because of bad
                      Message 10 of 19 , Aug 21, 2008
                      • 0 Attachment
                        Hi!
                        >> What do you guys think of this software?
                        >> http://www.mediachance.com/hdri/index.html
                        >>
                        What they write on the first page of the website seams to be a little
                        misleading. The intention to capture HDR too avoid disappointments
                        because of bad conventional photographs appears a bit strange to me.
                        Besides that, I did no try out this tool, I have worked using hdrgen
                        (anyhere.com) and its derived web-frontend webhdr (and I tried
                        photosphere, which is a GUI-version of hdrgen on the Mac) and pfstools,
                        which are all free, provide the user with a lot of information about
                        what is happening behind the scenes and have an active user community.
                        These tools have been validated in studies for accuracy and write
                        standard formats, so you can still choose between tools to tonemap the
                        hdrs. But it all depends on what you are planning to do.

                        CU Lars.
                      • Erik Krause
                        ... Thanks for mentioning! Unfortunately the comparison is a bit outdated. I d like to encourage anyone who uses either of this tools to update the information
                        Message 11 of 19 , Aug 21, 2008
                        • 0 Attachment
                          Carel wrote:
                          >
                          > The panotools Wiki has a nice comparison spreadsheet:
                          > http://wiki.panotools.org/HDR_Software_overview
                          >

                          Thanks for mentioning! Unfortunately the comparison is a bit outdated. I'd
                          like to encourage anyone who uses either of this tools to update the
                          information on the wiki. Contact me off list if you have any questions or
                          problems...


                          Carel wrote:
                          >
                          > I have tried almost all, except Photogenics (too expensive) and pfsTools
                          > (could not figure out how to install).
                          >

                          Try QTPFSGui instead, it's a frontend for the pfstools.


                          Carel wrote:
                          >
                          > I can only get Photomatix to work in batch mode, which makes it un-usable
                          > because you cant see what you are doing. Photomatix's anti-ghosting is
                          > also rather primitive. With Picturenaut, which is a current favorite of
                          > many on this list, I cant keep the highlights from blowing out (maybe
                          > just user error on my part). FDRTools gives me by far the best results and
                          > also gives plenty of options to interactively change the settings. That
                          > makes it a bit harder to learn. FDRTools has a method called "separation",
                          > where one can influence the amount of contribution of each bracketed shot
                          > to the final hdr. This helps a lot to minimize ghosting, but is not
                          > perfect. The masking method in Dynamic Photo HDR makes a lot more sense,
                          > because you only influence the area where ghosting takes place. But
                          > otherwise, DPHDR needs more development before it becomes useful. For
                          > tricky ghosting, one could save the HDR in DPHDR and then tonemap in
                          > FDRTools.
                          >

                          I personally found the results of enfuse superior to most of the "real" HDR
                          tools. Sometimes a tonemapping result could be tweaked to look almost as
                          good or even better than the enfuse result, but the magic of enfuse is, that
                          it gives good results almost without tweaking which makes it suitable for
                          batch processing. See http://wiki.panotools.org/Enfuse for details.

                          The drawback: no deghosting so far, although there was some progress in the
                          hugin project during the participation in the Google summer of code 2007.
                          Currently the developers are busy finalizing a new hugin version...

                          best regards

                          best regards

                          -----
                          Erik Krause
                          http://www.erik-krause.de
                          --
                          View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/HDR-software-tp13570249p19086146.html
                          Sent from the PanoToolsNG mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
                        • Sacha Griffin
                          I concur, I hate 90% of what is produced as hdr, and the other 10% drops my jaw. I just tried out dynamic photo-hdr, and after some hours of playing, was able
                          Message 12 of 19 , Aug 21, 2008
                          • 0 Attachment
                            I concur, I hate 90% of what is produced as hdr, and the other 10% drops my
                            jaw.

                            I just tried out dynamic photo-hdr, and after some hours of playing, was
                            able to create something quite a bit better than enfuse.

                            The settings found seem to work on other scenes.



                            Nice find yall.





                            Sacha Griffin

                            Southern Digital Solutions LLC

                            http://www.southern-digital.com

                            http://www.seeit360.net

                            404-551-4275









                            From: PanoToolsNG@yahoogroups.com [mailto:PanoToolsNG@yahoogroups.com] On
                            Behalf Of Erik Krause
                            Sent: Thursday, August 21, 2008 6:33 AM
                            To: PanoToolsNG@yahoogroups.com
                            Subject: Re: [PanoToolsNG] HDR software



                            I personally found the results of enfuse superior to most of the "real" HDR
                            tools. Sometimes a tonemapping result could be tweaked to look almost as
                            good or even better than the enfuse result, but the magic of enfuse is, that
                            it gives good results almost without tweaking which makes it suitable for
                            batch processing. See http://wiki.panotools.org/Enfuse for details.

                            The drawback: no deghosting so far, although there was some progress in the
                            hugin project during the participation in the Google summer of code 2007.
                            Currently the developers are busy finalizing a new hugin version...

                            best regards

                            best regards

                            -----
                            Erik Krause
                            http://www.erik-krause.de
                            --








                            [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                          • Philipp B. Koch
                            There s also a free windows GUI for TuFuse that was not mentioned yet at the panotools wiki site about Enfuse. It s similar to TuFuse Pro, but less powerful
                            Message 13 of 19 , Aug 21, 2008
                            • 0 Attachment
                              There's also a free windows GUI for TuFuse that was not mentioned yet at
                              the panotools wiki site about Enfuse. It's similar to TuFuse Pro, but
                              less powerful (e.g. not as many options like Focus blending). I've added
                              it (see http://wiki.panotools.org/Enfuse#Windows). Sometimes I get
                              better results with this, compared to Enfuse. Maybe someone likes to
                              give it a try.

                              Unfortunately, I have no clue who the author is, so I could only cite
                              his TuFuse forum member name. If someone knows more, please correct it
                              at the wiki page. Thanks.

                              Regards, Philipp Koch
                            • Ken Warner
                              I m waiting for Max to finish TuFusePro. I really like the interface.
                              Message 14 of 19 , Aug 21, 2008
                              • 0 Attachment
                                I'm waiting for Max to finish TuFusePro. I really like the
                                interface.

                                Philipp B. Koch wrote:
                                > There's also a free windows GUI for TuFuse that was not mentioned yet at
                                > the panotools wiki site about Enfuse. It's similar to TuFuse Pro, but
                                > less powerful (e.g. not as many options like Focus blending). I've added
                                > it (see http://wiki.panotools.org/Enfuse#Windows). Sometimes I get
                                > better results with this, compared to Enfuse. Maybe someone likes to
                                > give it a try.
                                >
                                > Unfortunately, I have no clue who the author is, so I could only cite
                                > his TuFuse forum member name. If someone knows more, please correct it
                                > at the wiki page. Thanks.
                                >
                                > Regards, Philipp Koch
                                >
                              • gregoryallandowning
                                If you are interested in seeing the next version of photosynth http://www.photosynth.com/ support panoramas you can add your me too here
                                Message 15 of 19 , Aug 21, 2008
                                • 0 Attachment
                                  If you are interested in seeing the next version of photosynth
                                  http://www.photosynth.com/ support panoramas you can add your "me too"
                                  here
                                  http://getsatisfaction.com/livelabs/topics/how_can_i_get_my_360_panorama_to_connect

                                  I tried with a bunch of images I shot for qtvr objects and it worked
                                  great!

                                  Looks like there servers are overloaded today because of the launch
                                  but I would bet that it is accessible tomorrow.

                                  -Greg
                                  http://www.xrez.com/
                                  http://www.gregdowning.com/
                                • Michael Hansky
                                  i had no success with my Oktoberfest panorama.... Photosyth did not take all images in one group.
                                  Message 16 of 19 , Aug 22, 2008
                                  • 0 Attachment
                                    i had no success with my Oktoberfest panorama....

                                    Photosyth did not take all images in one group.
                                    http://photosynth.net/view.aspx?cid=1ae7989f-624a-4fd5-9ae9-8777ba1f32b6


                                    In PTGUi it was no problem
                                    http://www.zooming.de/demo/Oktoberfest/Oktoberfest.htm


                                    Michael
                                    http://www.bodensee360.de




                                    gregoryallandowning schrieb:
                                    > If you are interested in seeing the next version of photosynth
                                    > http://www.photosynth.com/ support panoramas you can add your "me too"
                                    > here
                                    > http://getsatisfaction.com/livelabs/topics/how_can_i_get_my_360_panorama_to_connect
                                    >
                                    > I tried with a bunch of images I shot for qtvr objects and it worked
                                    > great!
                                    >
                                    > Looks like there servers are overloaded today because of the launch
                                    > but I would bet that it is accessible tomorrow.
                                    >
                                    > -Greg
                                    > http://www.xrez.com/
                                    > http://www.gregdowning.com/
                                    >
                                    >
                                    > ------------------------------------
                                    >
                                  • Bernhard Vogl
                                    ... When talking about HDR, i always tried to differentiate between 3 variants of dynamic range, LDR , MDR and HDR . I have summed up this here:
                                    Message 17 of 19 , Aug 22, 2008
                                    • 0 Attachment
                                      > I concur, I hate 90% of what is produced as hdr, and the other 10% drops
                                      > my jaw.

                                      When talking about HDR, i always tried to differentiate between 3 variants of dynamic range, "LDR", "MDR" and "HDR". I have summed up this here:
                                      http://thepanoramablog.blogspot.com/2008/08/flickr-hdr-vs-real-thing.html

                                      The blog entry also contains a link to Erik Reinhard's article about "Flickr HDR", which i think is worth reading:
                                      http://www.cs.bris.ac.uk/%7Ereinhard/tm_comp/flickr_hdr/Flickr%20HDR.html

                                      Best regards
                                      Bernhard
                                    • panovrx
                                      I did some more testing of Dynamic-Photo HDR. It will crash with a file load more than say 3 images 6000 by 3000 at 8 bit. But still its pseudo-hdr processing
                                      Message 18 of 19 , Aug 23, 2008
                                      • 0 Attachment
                                        I did some more testing of Dynamic-Photo HDR. It will crash with a
                                        file load more than say 3 images 6000 by 3000 at 8 bit. But still its
                                        pseudo-hdr processing of single Raw is interesting I think and I like
                                        its tweaking controls in the tonemapping window.

                                        Here is a cave I used it for
                                        http://www.mediavr.com/flash/orientcaveflash.htm
                                        With Dynamic-Photo HDR there were a few of usual (non-Enfuse) HDR
                                        software issues like solarization in some highlights and fringing
                                        but they were isolated and not hard to fix. I preferred it in the end
                                        for this pano to what I could get with Enfuse because it had more
                                        local contrast and still looked pretty natural. Not as sharp though
                                        maybe as what Enfuse could produce.

                                        Peter Murphy
                                        http://www.mediavr.com/blog

                                        --- In PanoToolsNG@yahoogroups.com, "Bernhard Vogl" <bvogl@...> wrote:
                                        >
                                        >
                                        > > I concur, I hate 90% of what is produced as hdr, and the other
                                        10% drops
                                        > > my jaw.
                                        >
                                        > When talking about HDR, i always tried to differentiate between 3
                                        variants of dynamic range, "LDR", "MDR" and "HDR". I have summed up
                                        this here:
                                        > http://thepanoramablog.blogspot.com/2008/08/flickr-hdr-vs-real-
                                        thing.html
                                        >
                                        > The blog entry also contains a link to Erik Reinhard's article
                                        about "Flickr HDR", which i think is worth reading:
                                        > http://www.cs.bris.ac.uk/%7Ereinhard/tm_comp/flickr_hdr/Flickr%
                                        20HDR.html
                                        >
                                        > Best regards
                                        > Bernhard
                                        >
                                      • Lars O. Grobe
                                        ... I did not really understand this. Couldn t you use just any software with more color depth to load your raw images and work on them? What do you use this
                                        Message 19 of 19 , Aug 24, 2008
                                        • 0 Attachment
                                          > file load more than say 3 images 6000 by 3000 at 8 bit. But still its
                                          > pseudo-hdr processing of single Raw is interesting I think

                                          I did not really understand this. Couldn't you use just any software
                                          with more color depth to load your raw images and work on them? What do
                                          you use this for?

                                          CU Lars.


                                          [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                                        Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.