# HDR 360 panos



## gpauwen (Oct 21, 2010)

Hello group,

I have experimented with HDR on 360 panos, here are the results:

Picasa Web Albums - Georg Pauwen - WebJPEGs#

I know they look very grungy, but I did that on purpose, they look more like illustrations. The original panos look rather...boring.

Let me know what your thoughts and comments are.

Regards,

Georg


----------



## Bynx (Oct 21, 2010)

I like most of your shots but the sky in every one of them really spoils the overall look. Some Photoshop and new clean sky would look a lot better. But I like the illustration look in your processing.


----------



## gpauwen (Oct 21, 2010)

Hi,

thanks for your feedback. I thought the sky would add a dramatic effect, maybe it is overdone... I will ty different versions. Actually, the panos were taken on overcast days, because of the equal lighting. I kind of like days with no sunshine, they ar like a giant softbox...

Regards,

Georg


----------



## Bynx (Oct 21, 2010)

Its ok if the sky is your main subject. But I feel the sky should just be there in the background and let your subjects shine.


----------



## nos33 (Oct 22, 2010)

i have to agree.  the sky looks a bit overdone.  the subjects look pretty good but you could tone those down as well.  good shots though


----------



## McNugget801 (Oct 22, 2010)

So what was the point of going the HDR route here because it certainly was not to expand the dynamic range of you image.  Why waste your time processing all the HDR images and stitching them rather just using using a filter in PS to make it look grungy?

The major mistake people make with HDR is getting to caught up with over the top tonemapping and I believe that this is what gives HDR a bad rep.  I think if you reprocess your HDR images and use tonemapping tools to help bring out more details that a single image would not capture you will be much happier with the end results.


not trying to be rude just honest


----------



## Bynx (Oct 22, 2010)

If done properly an HDR image is always better than the individual shots of which it is made. The big problem people have is screwing up the HDR image with bad tone mapping. That part I agree with McNugget.


----------



## gpauwen (Oct 22, 2010)

McNugget801 said:


> So what was the point of going the HDR route here because it certainly was not to expand the dynamic range of you image. Why waste your time processing all the HDR images and stitching them rather just using using a filter in PS to make it look grungy?
> 
> The major mistake people make with HDR is getting to caught up with over the top tonemapping and I believe that this is what gives HDR a bad rep. I think if you reprocess your HDR images and use tonemapping tools to help bring out more details that a single image would not capture you will be much happier with the end results.
> 
> ...


 
Hello,

thanks for your input. My workflow is to convert each RAW to five 16-bit TIFFs with 2 EV difference. To be honest, I have tried most of the filters that come with Photoshop, but nothing gets close to using the five TIFFs (40 actually for the 360 panos shown) in Photomatix. Which filter are you using to achieve the effect ? And do you use just one source photo ?

By the way, I was not aware that HDR had a bad rep. In my own personal opinion, why should it ? It all comes down to taste, and taste is...just that.

Thanks for your answers in advance.

Regards,

Georg


----------

