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

Re: [PanoToolsNG] hdr, photomatix and photoshop

Expand Messages
  • Carel
    ... Hi Masten, Photomatix has (had..? I have not used it for a while) a tendency to increase the saturation on the tonemapped result. Not so with their other
    Message 1 of 6 , Jun 1, 2008
      maston67 wrote:
      >
      > Hi
      >
      > Ive just started using hdr and am pretty amazed by the results.
      >
      > Some questions.
      >
      > - Been using photomatix trial and am thinking of buying. How does it
      > compare with the utility in the lastest versions of photoshop which I
      > havent got.
      >
      > - The windows in the images look fantastic but lights in the scene go
      > very orangey which looks kind of OK, but Id prefer them white. This
      > becomes worse when enhancing the image (to fix the flat renders) with a
      > bit of levels and colour saturation. Is there a way to fix this?
      >
      > Many thanks
      >
      > Masten
      >
      >
      >

      Hi Masten,

      Photomatix has (had..? I have not used it for a while) a tendency to
      increase the saturation on the tonemapped result. Not so with their other
      (non-tonemapping) algorithm.
      You should also look at FDRTools and the open source project Enfuse.

      Carel Struycken

      --
      View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/hdr%2C-photomatix-and-photoshop-tp17589771p17589980.html
      Sent from the PanoToolsNG mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
    • Erik Krause
      ... The true HDR tonemappers like in photomatix, FDRTools, picturenaut and so on are ways better than photoshop tonemapping tool. For a comparison an
      Message 2 of 6 , Jun 1, 2008
        On Sunday, June 01, 2008 at 20:27, maston67 wrote:

        > Ive just started using hdr and am pretty amazed by the results.
        >
        > Some questions.
        >
        > - Been using photomatix trial and am thinking of buying. How does it
        > compare with the utility in the lastest versions of photoshop which I
        > havent got.

        The "true" HDR tonemappers like in photomatix, FDRTools, picturenaut
        and so on are ways better than photoshop tonemapping tool. For a
        comparison an overview see
        http://wiki.panotools.org/HDR_Software_overview

        Additionally there is exposure fusion to mention, like implemented in
        enfuse, tufuse and PTGui pro, which in many panographers' opinion
        gives even better results than the HDR tonemappers:
        http://wiki.panotools.org/Enfuse

        > - The windows in the images look fantastic but lights in the scene go
        > very orangey which looks kind of OK, but Id prefer them white. This
        > becomes worse when enhancing the image (to fix the flat renders) with a
        > bit of levels and colour saturation. Is there a way to fix this?

        This problem results from the different color temperature of the
        respective light sources. You can either go for blue outside and
        white tungsten lights or yellow tungsten interior and white outside.
        As a compromise you could use a white balance that is somwhere
        intermediate to get only slightly bluish outside and less intense
        yellow inside. Or you do a selective desaturation of either blue-cyan
        (if WB is for inside) or yellow-orange (if WB was for outside) in
        photoshop. Perhaps you need to mask respective colored details which
        should not be desaturated.

        With enfuse you can even try to use different WB for the different
        exposure steps, but this often gives strange results, f.e. if a
        reflection of window or interior that is lie from outside light is
        blue but the window itself is white...

        best regtards
        Erik Krause
        http://www.erik-krause.de
      • maston67
        Hi Carel OK, Carel Ill have a look at those. Thanks Masten ... does it ... which I ... scene go ... This ... with a ... to ... their other ... Enfuse. ...
        Message 3 of 6 , Jun 2, 2008
          Hi Carel

          OK, Carel Ill have a look at those. Thanks

          Masten

          --- In PanoToolsNG@yahoogroups.com, Carel <cs@...> wrote:
          >
          >
          >
          >
          > maston67 wrote:
          > >
          > > Hi
          > >
          > > Ive just started using hdr and am pretty amazed by the results.
          > >
          > > Some questions.
          > >
          > > - Been using photomatix trial and am thinking of buying. How
          does it
          > > compare with the utility in the lastest versions of photoshop
          which I
          > > havent got.
          > >
          > > - The windows in the images look fantastic but lights in the
          scene go
          > > very orangey which looks kind of OK, but Id prefer them white.
          This
          > > becomes worse when enhancing the image (to fix the flat renders)
          with a
          > > bit of levels and colour saturation. Is there a way to fix this?
          > >
          > > Many thanks
          > >
          > > Masten
          > >
          > >
          > >
          >
          > Hi Masten,
          >
          > Photomatix has (had..? I have not used it for a while) a tendency
          to
          > increase the saturation on the tonemapped result. Not so with
          their other
          > (non-tonemapping) algorithm.
          > You should also look at FDRTools and the open source project
          Enfuse.
          >
          > Carel Struycken
          >
          > --
          > View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/hdr%2C-
          photomatix-and-photoshop-tp17589771p17589980.html
          > Sent from the PanoToolsNG mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
          >
        • maston67
          Hi Erik Ok. Forget about Photoshop then. ... Wow, didn t realise there were so many products. What do you think produces the best results. Output for me is for
          Message 4 of 6 , Jun 2, 2008
            Hi Erik

            Ok. Forget about Photoshop then.

            >The "true" HDR tonemappers like in photomatix, FDRTools, picturenaut
            >and so on are ways better than photoshop tonemapping tool. For a
            >comparison an overview see
            >http://wiki.panotools.org/HDR_Software_overview
            >Additionally there is exposure fusion to mention, like implemented
            >in enfuse, tufuse and PTGui pro, which in many panographers' opinion
            >gives even better results than the HDR tonemappers:
            >http://wiki.panotools.org/Enfuse

            Wow, didn't realise there were so many products. What do you think
            produces the best results. Output for me is for web so I dont care
            about creating any hdr file, I just need the tonemapped results. Is
            it true, would you say then that exposure fusion is better as used
            by PTGUI pro. Manybe that would be the best option for me then as
            workflow with ptgui (3.7) and photomatix is terrible. Ill download
            the trial and see for myself.

            As regards the colour temperature thing it's not a white balance
            issue as the images I'm using all have correct white balances for
            outsides and insides on the original raw files. They only go orange
            after tonemapping. Ill try the desaturation thing. That's obvious
            isnt it.

            Thanks for the advice

            Masten



            --- In PanoToolsNG@yahoogroups.com, "Erik Krause" <erik.krause@...>
            wrote:
            >
            > On Sunday, June 01, 2008 at 20:27, maston67 wrote:
            >
            > > Ive just started using hdr and am pretty amazed by the results.
            > >
            > > Some questions.
            > >
            > > - Been using photomatix trial and am thinking of buying. How
            does it
            > > compare with the utility in the lastest versions of photoshop
            which I
            > > havent got.
            >
            > The "true" HDR tonemappers like in photomatix, FDRTools,
            picturenaut
            > and so on are ways better than photoshop tonemapping tool. For a
            > comparison an overview see
            > http://wiki.panotools.org/HDR_Software_overview
            >
            > Additionally there is exposure fusion to mention, like implemented
            in
            > enfuse, tufuse and PTGui pro, which in many panographers' opinion
            > gives even better results than the HDR tonemappers:
            > http://wiki.panotools.org/Enfuse
            >
            > > - The windows in the images look fantastic but lights in the
            scene go
            > > very orangey which looks kind of OK, but Id prefer them white.
            This
            > > becomes worse when enhancing the image (to fix the flat renders)
            with a
            > > bit of levels and colour saturation. Is there a way to fix this?
            >
            > This problem results from the different color temperature of the
            > respective light sources. You can either go for blue outside and
            > white tungsten lights or yellow tungsten interior and white
            outside.
            > As a compromise you could use a white balance that is somwhere
            > intermediate to get only slightly bluish outside and less intense
            > yellow inside. Or you do a selective desaturation of either blue-
            cyan
            > (if WB is for inside) or yellow-orange (if WB was for outside) in
            > photoshop. Perhaps you need to mask respective colored details
            which
            > should not be desaturated.
            >
            > With enfuse you can even try to use different WB for the different
            > exposure steps, but this often gives strange results, f.e. if a
            > reflection of window or interior that is lie from outside light is
            > blue but the window itself is white...
            >
            > best regtards
            > Erik Krause
            > http://www.erik-krause.de
            >
          • Erik Krause
            ... enfuse and tufuse used on the single image stacks. There is a GUI version of tufuse, called tufuse Pro: http://www.tawbaware.com/tufusepro.htm PTGui uses
            Message 5 of 6 , Jun 2, 2008
              On Monday, June 02, 2008 at 20:31, maston67 wrote:

              > What do you think produces the best results.

              enfuse and tufuse used on the single image stacks. There is a GUI
              version of tufuse, called tufuse Pro:
              http://www.tawbaware.com/tufusepro.htm
              PTGui uses exposure fusion on the result panoramas, which is time
              consuming and can give artifacts in Zenith and Nadir.

              > As regards the colour temperature thing it's not a white balance
              > issue as the images I'm using all have correct white balances for
              > outsides and insides on the original raw files. They only go orange
              > after tonemapping.

              Yes, as Carel wrote photomatix (and FDRTools to a lower extent) have
              the tendency to increase saturation (sometimes in a strange way).
              Exposure fusion won't do that, it is a very sophisticated way of
              exposure blending which uses the best exposed parts of each image.
              Hence there should be no change in saturation. But actually it is a
              white balance issue, intensified by tonemapping.

              best regards
              Erik Krause
              http://www.erik-krause.de
            Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.