|
I've seen that a lot of people use photomatix to combine photos for HDR. Certainly works well, but with that watermark (and the 99 dollar price tag otherwise!) it's not going to work for me. I've played around with qtpfsgui and cannot find a tone mapping algorithm which gets the same results. Anyone with experience with qtpfsgui that can help or who have another, preferably free, HDR editor which works well for them?
|
#
¿
Jan 26, 2009 04:27
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 2, 2024 20:55 |
|
|
germskr posted:I think Photoshop would be your best alternative to Photomatix although to be honest, for what it does, $99 is a pretty decent price to pay. Well, for that matter photoshop is expensive. But I've played around with the merge to HDR on CS3 and I can't find a way to tone map. And 99 dollars seems like a lot to spend when I've not done much HDR and it has fairly limited use for me. The Qtpfsgui incorporates 8-9 published algorithms - you'd think that unless Photomatix uses a secret, proprietary one that you could recreate what they've done on the open source platform. Does anyone know?
|
|
#
¿
Jan 26, 2009 06:15
|
|
|
Kodo Zoku posted:I use qtpfsgui, however, there's no way for me to help you out here. I have no idea what the results you're looking for look like. I've gotten some very "surreal" results out of qtp, using the Fattal algo- the kind of effect that the "20 HDR images that will BLOWYOURFUCKINGMIND" top reddits look like. Is that what you're going for, or are you looking for a well balanced image, something that doesn't scream HDR? I played with it for a few hours last night. I've also already played around with CS3 the same way that the youtube video described. I like to shoot landscapes and a lot of what I shoot are canyons. Expose the bottom, blow out the sky, etc. So, I typically will bracket and merge - the goal is to create something as realistic and as close to natural as possible. I'll keep playing around with qtpfsgui...
|
|
#
¿
Jan 26, 2009 22:20
|
|