How the fuck do people do this:
http://www.flickr.co...ommon/2117069691/
I'm looking at the raw file and the intermediate processed version, and I have no clue how one would do that.
Question for you
How the fuck do people do this:
http://www.flickr.co...ommon/2117069691/ I'm looking at the raw file and the intermediate processed version, and I have no clue how one would do that. --
Drew |
|
|
Not Peter, but ...
http://en.wikipedia....wiki/Tone_mapping
Apparently Photoshop can do it. http://tv.adobe.com/...mapping-workflow/ HTH a little. Cheers, Scott. |
|
|
Re: Question for you
Photomatix and then a stupid artsy-fartsy filter.
All hiding the fact that he fucked up his exposure in the first place. But hey, people love that shit. Who am I to argue? |
|
|
Scott's link showed mostly composites from multiple images
I've seen how to do HDR that way. The link I posted, it looked like he was saying it was a single image. And yes, I thought the exposure sucked.
--
Drew |
|
|
HDR doesn't necessitate multiple exposures
although it's the most common way of doing it.
Tone-mapping and whatnot can be done with one, two or a gazillion exposures. |
A change of pace for me
- (pwhysall)
- (9)
- April 8, 2013, 10:11:24 PM EDT
Nice. Shiny.
- (Another Scott)
- April 8, 2013, 10:31:22 PM EDT
I am persuaded
- (Ashton)
- (1)
- April 9, 2013, 05:15:54 AM EDT
I cannot resist pointing out...
- (altmann)
- April 9, 2013, 07:17:38 PM EDT
Question for you
- (drook)
- (4)
- April 9, 2013, 11:01:00 AM EDT
Not Peter, but ...
- (Another Scott)
- April 9, 2013, 11:22:51 AM EDT
Re: Question for you
- (pwhysall)
- (2)
- April 9, 2013, 12:19:00 PM EDT
Scott's link showed mostly composites from multiple images
- (drook)
- (1)
- April 9, 2013, 01:19:58 PM EDT
HDR doesn't necessitate multiple exposures
- (pwhysall)
- April 9, 2013, 02:35:53 PM EDT
Nice
- (jake123)
- April 9, 2013, 09:35:52 PM EDT
