Re: Testing Enfuse in high contrast environs...
- --- In PanoToolsNG@yahoogroups.com, Eric O'Brien <ericob@...> wrote:
>I dont think so with Enfuse -- it is a different kettle of fish
> "A bit flat looking." That is rather inevitable in the process of
> compressing a tonal range, isn't it? ;)
entirely from other tone mappers (at least in contrast mode). I think
the idea of just shooting a wide range of exposures, rendering them
from Raw in a uniform fashion and feeding them to Enfuse is not
necessarily the optimal approach. I think 4 or 5 exposures would
probably be the maximum one would need for almost all scenes. Each of
these should be processed differently I would think re contrast, color
and noise control. The shadow exposure for instance should be contrasty
in the blacks and dark tones and have flat, blownout, highlights.
Conversely the extreme highlight exposure should have flat midtones and
shadows -- using selections etc if necessary. Enfuse is like a spatial
tone separation process rather than a physical scene illumination
recording and tone mapping process -- at least that is how I think of
> > --- In PanoToolsNG@yahoogroups.com, "robert_harshman" <image360@>
> > wrote:
> >>> http://www.mab3d.com/QTVR/brickworksQTVR.html
> >>> Comments on the quality of the results (and the panoramas) is
> >>> appreciated. Enfuse handled the glowing beams of light and overall
> >>> wide range quite admirably, IMHO.