agentmoeller
Guru
- Messages
- 1,376
- Likes
- 1,026
Welcome to Photoshop Gurus forum. Register a free account today to become a member! It's completely free. Once signed in, you'll enjoy an ad-free experience and be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
Tom, I really like the Photomatix version.
Agent, I think you will find that software dedicated to HDR will provide much more convenient controls of the many parameters involved in an HDR conversion. This usually translates to better final results. In addition, compared to PS, these software packages are dirt cheap.
As an example, I processed the single, non-HDR image that you posted using both Photomatix and Dynamic Photo HDR, two fairly well know HDR packages. I've included screen shots of the settings I used for each. A wide variety of final "looks" can be obtained by all these methods, but if I had access to the full bracketed set of starting images, the results would clearly have been even better, particularly w.r.t. noise and harshness in the shadow areas.
These results are also over-the-top, but more from the point of view of color saturation than the harshness and halos I suspect bothered Crotale. I tried to adjust these to look a bit more like what people usually have in mind when they think as a moderate HDR look.
First, for easy comparison, is the single original that you posted down-rezz'ed to display in-line in this forum without triggering the forum's compression software and adding its own harshness.
View attachment 34432
#2 - Your PS "merge to HDR" result
View attachment 34433
#3 - Dynamic Photo HDR
View attachment 34434
#4 - Photomatix
View attachment 34435
#5 - Screen shot of the settings I used in Dynamic Photo HDR
View attachment 34436
#6 - Screen shot of the settings I used in Photomatix
View attachment 34437
I hope you find these of interest.
Regards,
Tom