HDR from Film

D

drjoke

Well-known
Local time
5:42 PM
Joined
Apr 12, 2007
Messages
217
View My Gallery
Single exposure scanned at -2 -1 0 1 2 using Nikon Coolscan V ED then combining using Photomatix.

Taken with Zeiss Ikon + UC Hexanon 35MM on Velvia 100

ORIGINAL
2400734701_1a03544eea.jpg

http://www.flickr.com/photos/drjoke/2400734701/


HDR
2401564948_9a34e86f3f.jpg

http://www.flickr.com/photos/drjoke/2401564948/
 
That will work as long as your single exposure contains enough detail at both ends of the film's latitude (or the scanner's ability to detect detail in your film).

HDR in digital is not new - people did this with paper negatives back in the early days of photography. But the reason for three (or more) different exposures in a digital HDR photograph is to make up for the lack of latitude in digital sensors. Color print film has more latitude to begin with. But if you had run out of detail on the dark or the light (for example, the details in his dark clothing), then your technique will not be able to recover it.
 
1) This is basically automated. I don't have to adjust too many things.
2) If I scan just once, and try to play with highlights and shadows, then I lose too many details. With different analog gains, my scanner captures different sets of detail at the very least for Velvia. I really do not find the need for other film yet.
 
Bobfrance said:
Call me a luddite, but couldn't you get the same effect in photoshop by adjusting the levels and dodging & burning a little?
Click to expand...

The original concept of HDR was to capture more latitude than the recording media was capable of retaining, whether we are talking about film or digital. Many scenes contain more latitude than any recording media can capture, with the exception of our eyes.

Photoshop cannot recreate information that is lost. So if the details blow out to white or sludge up to black, PS cannot get them back - if they are truly gone.

What the O/P is probably trying to do is scan the same negative using different exposure values in an attempt to pull the most detail possible from the neg, and then combining them using HDR techniques in PS. An interesting concept - but again, if the film did not originally capture the detail, you cannot recreate it. If it did capture the detail, but it is very very faint, then this procedure may be effective.

True HDR requires multiple exposures, whether by digital or film media, at this time. Future breakthroughs may change this.
 
Bobfrance said:
HDR aside, that a very nice shot. 🙂

It could be my monitor but it seems to have a blue cast.
BTW how do you adjust the gain on a scanner?
Click to expand...

Some scanning software allows you to manipulate the black and white points, effectively moving the histogram and the 'exposure' in that sense. I use Vuescan, and it does do that.

And I do not wish to pick nits - technically this is still not HDR, but I understand the point the O/P is making.
 
I have Vuescan Professional, but I haven't been able to understand how it actually works.
White and black point works better when I select Multiple Exposure? I should perform a more detailed analysis using that program before I give up. Pixel peeping is one thing, but detail peeping is causing me so much eyestrain and headache that I cannot endure more than 30 minutes a day.
 
I'd like to give it a try, but I don't expect my Epson Perfection is up to it.

Landscknechte - I run Photoshop on a modified steam driven Turing engine of course. I don't want to get sucked into this digital crazyness! 😉
 
drjoke,

Just out of curiousity, what are you planning on doing with the HDR images? Compositing elements in or some effects of some kind? I'd be interested to see what an HDR blur looks like on your pics.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom