Sunrise Vineyard Photos
-
AND nice photos Chris. In a few weeks I am moving to Arizona's wine country. Bet you didn't know we had a wine country. It is to Arizona what Andalucia is to Spain. I am moving so far south I have to pass the border patrol check point just to see a doctor or buy groceries. Hasta la vista . . . . baby!
-
Thanks Roger!
Yes, I like the gigpan technology. I've seen that before. I would love to get a good gimbal head, its been on my list for a while. I was planning on inventing "gigapan", then I discovered it already existed
I was disappointed. But I still would love to do some HDR pano's.I guess what I'm mostly confused about is how to "close" the sky and ground. The sky seems like a straight upwards shot could be good enough if the software can process it into the pano. But downwards, with the tripod feet, seems tricky.
But does that even matter for HDR backgrounds for rendering? I always assume they need perfect spherical panos where the sky and ground have to meet perfectly, but maybe that's not the case. Solo, is that necessary?
Roger, you're not doing much to deter me from my belief that you are in fact the inspiration behind the "Dos Equis" spokesman, the most interesting man in the world.
-
@chris fullmer said:
Thanks everyone!
HDR is just a way of merging different exposures of the same image. So to shoot HDR, you have to shoot a few identical pictures, changing only the exposure. Many people tend to take 3 photos. 1 underexposed (looks dark), one regular exposure, and one overexposed (looks too light). Then you use software to merge them into an HDR file. Most HDR images look bad by default. But they open up a LOT of processing potential because they have color data for the bright areas and the dark areas of an image, something regular photos do not capture well.
So the images above were merged together into an HDR file, then I processed that to bring out the color and luminance, and exported a jpeg - and that is what you see above. But I still have the plain hdr file.
Now to do a spherical hdr is beyond me. I still have not exactly figured that one out. I think partially I just don't know exactly what is needed in the renderer.
thanks Chris. . .I totally understood that.
Actually if you said "bracketing" I woulda gotten it. Back in my day. . .when I shot on glass plates under a cover with a pan of flash powder. . .that's the term we used
-
The Most Interesting Man In The World
"Stay thirsty, my friend."
"His words carry a weight that would break a less interesting man's jaw."
"He's a lover, not a fighter; but he's also a fighter, so don't get any ideas."
"He is the life of parties he has never attended."
"His beard alone has experienced more than a lesser man's entire body."
"He can speak French... in Russian."
"He once punched a magician. That's right. You heard me."
"If he were to punch you in the face, you would have to fight off the strong urge to thank him."
"If he patted you on the back, you would put it on your resume."
"He once taught a dog to bark... in Spanish."
"He bowls overhand."
"Sharks have a week dedicated to him."
"He lives vicariously... through himself."
"He once had an awkward moment, just to see how it feels."
"When in Rome, they do as he does."
"He is: The Most Interesting Man in the World."
And he even slightly resembles him.
Chris, You know what how about a test? I do not believe it has to be seamless as one can rotate as needed, however I do think the sun needs to be roughly in the center.
We use HDR in many ways, some is just to give light to a render, sometimes to give light and backgrounds, even adding a physical sun in the spot where the sun in in the HDR to give sharper shadows and then there is the image being used as the actual scene where you drop your model onto an infinite plane with a shadow catcher. Now the latter will require a more precise HDR spherical image with nothing in the foreground and lots of open space for one to place ones model.
-
See:
http://www.pauldebevec.com/Probes/You can use panos for simple backgrounds and you can also use them as lighting simulators. And, you could probably use one background and mix it with another HDR used to set the subject lighting although the two would need similar qualities if you wanted the effect to be convincing. Since the tripod feet are unlikely to be in a final render and they are unlikely to have much effect on your lighting I would not worry about them. If somehow they did effect your final image, a little photoshop prior to combining your images should get rid of the problem.
I really enjoy the most interesting man in the world thing, but the world is just an illusion so perhaps a Buddhist Rene Descartes would have said, "I imagine, therefore I am."
-
Well, what I know I can do is make a cylindrical true HDR pano that might ignore the sky and the ground a little. So I'm not sure what that means for your render if you try to look upwards. The perfect top won't align. And the exact straight down wouldn't either.
I've looked at doing this for years now, and somehow I always get caught up on this same issue. So once I get one made, I'll send it to you Pete and Roger. You guys can hopefully tell me what was right or wrong about it. I won't get to this imediately though I don't think. Its pretty gloomy out right now.
-
@unknownuser said:
I won't get to this imediately though I don't think. Its pretty gloomy out right now.
could be good as gloomy means muted shadows
-
-
nice shots! how do you like photomatix? i haven't spent any $$ on hdr software yet. need to save up for lightroom.
here are a few quick and dirty handheld panos, shot raw. i used hugin to stitch them together:
west side market, cleveland, ohio by mbeganyi, on Flickr
cle-pano by mbeganyi, on Flickr
(i have another version of both with a bit more PP done... that bridge scene would have helped to shoot multiple exposures, but these were done with a 4 year old running around...)i have tried a few sterogrpahic projections, but the subject matter caused me trouble (on a bridge...).
here's a good flickr tutorial:http://www.flickr.com/photos/jftphotography/505670753/
would love to shoot site photos for modeling and do a spherical - but haven't stepped up to getting a tripod head yet. would be nice, but i need to get some better camera equipment first...
-
So I've done lots of regular panoramas, using photoshop to stitch them together. I've shot lots of HDR images. I think I just don't get the rendering process or workflow. So in the renderer, you use an hdr 360 pano for the lighting, and then do you use that same image for the background? Or is it a nice looking processed jpeg that you use for the background plate?
Or do you normally not even render with a background image and does the model just get added to video footage in post or something?
I just feel like there are some workflow issues I don't understand, or maybe there are so many different ways to do it I'm having a hard time understanding it all. Anyhow, for now I'll just try to make a 360 cylindrical full hdr pano. That I can do.
-
@David_H - The reason I didn't call it "bracketing" is because that is much fancier photographer jargon than I'm comfortable with
-
Jargon . . .MOI???
I wouldn't know an F-stop from F Troop. . . .
-
@unknownuser said:
Jargon . . .MOI???
I wouldn't know an F-stop from F Troop. . . .
But I do and promise that after this house purchase lunacy of mine I will create a tutorial on the subject of panoramas and HDRIs.
-
Solo, you forgot one thing about the most interesting man.
He uses the women's bathroom so lesser men will not peek and feel inferior.
-
chris, this isn't directed at you, as i like to play around with hdr a bit too (nowhere near as nice as some of your results...), but i found it funny (and i'm not a photographer at all...)
-
Wow, that's remarkably accurate!
I'm directly above the "T" in Time. In the HDR hole for a little, in the flickr, photoshop world, just past gearfaggotry (though I'm too poor to really enter into that), and I'm currently wishing I could get to the one exposure per motive. It really is accurate.
-
@chris fullmer said:
Wow, that's remarkably accurate!
I'm directly above the "T" in Time. In the HDR hole for a little, in the flickr, photoshop world, just past gearfaggotry (though I'm too poor to really enter into that), and I'm currently wishing I could get to the one exposure per motive. It really is accurate.
yeah, my budget (mainly because i spend too much on bicycles and camping gear) keeps me out of the gearfaggotry camp -
although i'm saving my pennies for something a bit more versatile than my wee canon g12.i do miss my old nikon film slr (and a few lenses) from grad school. not sure where it ended up - parents, brothers place, donation bin... but the immediacy of digital will keep me from digging out a film camera. (and also the lack of wanting to setup a darkroom in my basement - i can still smell the room from the only photo class i took).
i'm interested in the hdr stuff simply to take better architectural photos of projects i work on. i'm trying to keep them from getting overdone, but have a lot to learn.
barn_blended_fused by mbeganyi, on Flickr -
That chart scares the crap out of me as I am well past the center of the time line and it looks like death is the only event left.
Advertisement