# Ferrari F40 in HDR



## JRWappel (Jun 26, 2012)

Hey guys,

I just registered here.  I've become a huge fan of HDR photography... at least when its tastefully done.  I figured I'd share a few of my creations.  Feel free to critique and criticize... I'm a big boy, I can take it!  

This is shot is on a Ferrari F40 taken at the 2012 Greenwich Concours D'Elegance.  The shot was taken with a Canon 5D MKII and a 24-105mm f/4 L lens without a filter.  







Lets hear what you think.

Thanks,

  -JRW


----------



## robertandrewphoto (Jun 26, 2012)

You have some halos going on in the top right, the clouds in the top left mask any halos that would have occurred though which is pretty good.  

I also noticed the  front tire is more of a foggy black rather than a black.  You don't even necessarily need to tonemap to fix that, a little photoshop could help.

Good shot, just needs to be fine tuned a little bit.


----------



## JAC526 (Jun 26, 2012)

Did you take multiple exposures and merge them togehter or did you tonemap a single image?


----------



## JRWappel (Jun 26, 2012)

robertandrewphoto said:


> You have some halos going on in the top right, the clouds in the top left mask any halos that would have occurred though which is pretty good.
> 
> I also noticed the  front tire is more of a foggy black rather than a black.  You don't even necessarily need to tonemap to fix that, a little photoshop could help.
> 
> Good shot, just needs to be fine tuned a little bit.



Seems about right.  I'll see what I can do...



JAC526 said:


> Did you take multiple exposures and merge them togehter or did you tonemap a single image?



Well, this was one of those times where taking multiple exposures wasn't going to work out too well.  This came from a single RAW image.  Post processing was done in Photoshop CS6 and Topaz Adjust.  It was really my first time working with TA but I really like it so far.

   -JRW


----------



## JAC526 (Jun 26, 2012)

I figured with people in it it had to only be one image.

Btw...what a nice car.


----------



## Compaq (Jun 26, 2012)

JAC526 said:


> I figured with people in it it had to only be one image.
> 
> Btw...what a nice car.




Photomatix's de-ghosting is pretty good, and I'm confident people wouldn't be ghosts unless they were running like crazy.

edit: epic calves on man in the background


----------



## actionfx (Jun 26, 2012)

Nice job retaining the realism. Just a few points of color issues as mentioned above, but overall nice job. Some masking in photosho would take care of some of those issues.


----------



## fjrabon (Jun 26, 2012)

Overall pretty good shot, except for the dynamic range being too wide for one shot, lol.


----------



## McNugget801 (Jun 26, 2012)

when the blacks look blue you have a problem


----------



## KmH (Jun 26, 2012)

So being just 1 exposure, it's not an HDR, but a tone mapped photo that has not had the high dynamic range in the scene accurately rendered. From the looks of the sky, the dynamic range of the original photo has been substantially reduced by the tone mapping, and a somewhat murky glaze has some how been added over the entire image.


----------



## JRWappel (Jun 26, 2012)

I have attached the original UNEDITED image.





McNugget801 said:


> when the blacks look blue you have a problem



Looking at the original picture, I can see your point... especially related to the black car n the left.  Not something I had considered until you mentioned it.



KmH said:


> So being just 1 exposure, it's not an HDR, but a tone mapped photo that has not had the high dynamic range in the scene accurately rendered. From the looks of the sky, the dynamic range of the original photo has been substantially reduced by the tone mapping, and a somewhat murky glaze has some how been added over the entire image.



From everything that I had read, creating an HDR image from multiple exposures of a RAW file is perfectly valid.  In fact, its really the only way to do it with a scene where there is any form of movement.

I do appreciate the comments.  Its allowed me to see things that I didn't see before.

Thanks,

  -JRW


----------



## EDL (Jun 26, 2012)

I would agree that processing multiple exposures from a single RAW can be valid IF the single RAW actually captures the whole dynamic range in a single shot.  Unfortunately, they don't.  The point is to take multiple exposures so you can capture the whole range, or at the very least more of the range than a single shot can and combine them into a single shot that displays that range.

I agree that tone mapped images do look good because I like the saturated colors they often present, but they are not HDR photos.

With that said, I like your tone mapped F-40 very much. Only issue I have, as mentioned, is the bluish cast to the blacks, especially the headlight bezel, but I don't find it overly distracting.


----------



## inaka (Jun 26, 2012)

After seeing the original pic, I think it's better to post-process the original and not do HDR on this at all.


----------



## JAC526 (Jun 26, 2012)

I like the original more.


----------



## JRWappel (Jun 27, 2012)

EDL said:


> I would agree that processing multiple exposures from a single RAW can be valid IF the single RAW actually captures the whole dynamic range in a single shot.  Unfortunately, they don't.  The point is to take multiple exposures so you can capture the whole range, or at the very least more of the range than a single shot can and combine them into a single shot that displays that range.
> 
> I agree that tone mapped images do look good because I like the saturated colors they often present, but they are not HDR photos.
> 
> With that said, I like your tone mapped F-40 very much. Only issue I have, as mentioned, is the bluish cast to the blacks, especially the headlight bezel, but I don't find it overly distracting.



Thanks.  After this came up in this thread, I did a little research online and found many different interpretations of what constitutes a true HDR image.  I understand your point about trying to capture the entire dynamic range... makes sense.  Unfortunately, that's not always possible (usually due to movement) so I think the single RAW file works and is HDR ... just lacks some of the range of a multiple exposure HDR image.



inaka said:


> After seeing the original pic, I think it's better to post-process the original and not do HDR on this at all.


 


JAC526 said:


> I like the original more.



Thanks for the feedback.  Maybe I should just stick to the camera and forget about processing! :lmao:

Anyway, thanks for all of the comments.  I really like the picture... its one of my favorite cars of all time.  I have a few others that I'm working on that I'll post later.

   -JRW


----------



## Compaq (Jun 27, 2012)

Personally, I dig tonemapped images. I think many become better with some tonemapping. Does that make me a n00b? Maybe so, but I like the pop.


----------



## jamesbjenkins (Jun 27, 2012)

After seeing your original, I think you'd have been better off just tweaking it instead of opting for the tone mapping.

All you really need from the original is a curves and levels layer, and a little dodge/burn...

Nice image!


----------



## molested_cow (Jun 27, 2012)

If I were you, I won't tonemap the image. Some RAW editing plus dodge and burn will do a good job, I think.


----------



## EDL (Jun 27, 2012)

JRWappel said:


> Thanks.  After this came up in this thread, I did a little research online and found many different interpretations of what constitutes a true HDR image.  I understand your point about trying to capture the entire dynamic range... makes sense.  Unfortunately, that's not always possible (usually due to movement) so I think the single RAW file works and is HDR ... just lacks some of the range of a multiple exposure HDR image.



There are ways of capturing multiple exposures with movement and then use the software to de-ghost it.  It requires fast AEB in the camera though.

The human eye can see around 24 f-stops of dynamic range.  A single digital camera sensor only about 9-10 for a single shot.  HDR is, by definiton specifically for capturing and displaying more range than the camera sees in a single exposure.  The intent is to end up with a photo that displays the range more closely associated to what the human eye can see.  So, no a tone mapped, single exposure is not, by definition an HDR.


----------



## Blairg (Jun 27, 2012)

JRWappel said:
			
		

> Hey guys,
> 
> I just registered here.  I've become a huge fan of HDR photography... at least when its tastefully done.  I figured I'd share a few of my creations.  Feel free to critique and criticize... I'm a big boy, I can take it!
> 
> ...



I want that car


----------



## Bynx (Jun 28, 2012)

It seems every file that is monkeyed with is being called HDR. Isnt there a thread for those kinds of files?


----------



## Steve5D (Jun 28, 2012)

I, too, really prefer the original.

The edited one, to me, seems to have some crazy color issues; some kind of tint...


----------



## JRWappel (Jun 28, 2012)

Steve5D said:


> I, too, really prefer the original.
> 
> The edited one, to me, seems to have some crazy color issues; some kind of tint...



Yeah, after posting it and listening to the feedback, I see that the blacks are not crisp and have too much of a blueish tint. 

   -JRW


----------

