Quantcast

Pseudo HDR Enfuse vs. Silkypix direct highlight recovery

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
25 messages Options
12
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Pseudo HDR Enfuse vs. Silkypix direct highlight recovery

panovrx
Here is an example of how extracting multiple EVs from a raw file
and using Enfuse on them to make a composite can give better highlight
recovery than standard raw software tools used directly.

This is an crop from a jpg made directly with Silkypix from a raw file,
part of a pano sequence I shot today.
http://www.mediavr.com/desk.jpg
You can see the details on the papers on the desk are blown out, even
though I am using the maximum highlight recovery setting in Silkypix on
the raw file (and Silkypix has good highlight recovery  -- not as good
as Raw Therapee or DXO maybe but still pretty good).

Here is the same desk in the stitched pano ... using Enfuse on 4 EVs
images extracted with Silkypix from each component raw image (a single
exposure raw sequence). (-3EV, -1.5EV, 0EV, 2EV)
http://www.mediavr.com/judging.htm

the highlight detail is a lot better in the Enfused pseudo hdr composite

Peter


Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Pseudo HDR Enfuse vs. Silkypix direct highlight recovery

Philipp B. Koch
Hello Peter,

very impressing example indeed! Seems like I should finally try this
myself, since I normally shoot bracketed JPGs and suffer from things
like moving clouds a lot :-)

Regards, Philipp


panovrx schrieb:

> Here is an example of how extracting multiple EVs from a raw file
> and using Enfuse on them to make a composite can give better highlight
> recovery than standard raw software tools used directly.
>
> This is an crop from a jpg made directly with Silkypix from a raw file,
> part of a pano sequence I shot today.
> http://www.mediavr.com/desk.jpg
> You can see the details on the papers on the desk are blown out, even
> though I am using the maximum highlight recovery setting in Silkypix on
> the raw file (and Silkypix has good highlight recovery  -- not as good
> as Raw Therapee or DXO maybe but still pretty good).
>
> Here is the same desk in the stitched pano ... using Enfuse on 4 EVs
> images extracted with Silkypix from each component raw image (a single
> exposure raw sequence). (-3EV, -1.5EV, 0EV, 2EV)
> http://www.mediavr.com/judging.htm
>
> the highlight detail is a lot better in the Enfused pseudo hdr composite
>
> Peter
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------
>
>  

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

AW: Pseudo HDR Enfuse vs. Silkypix direct highlight recovery

ptgroup
Hm I still try with TuFuse and setting -b  -2 -b +2
but I am not satisfied with the results so far.
But it sould be a easy way to create HDR like images.
Ciao
mike
www.360de.de

----------------------------------

  -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
  Von: [hidden email] [mailto:[hidden email]]Im
Auftrag von Philipp B. Koch
  Gesendet: Montag, 24. März 2008 12:57
  An: [hidden email]
  Betreff: Re: [PanoToolsNG] Pseudo HDR Enfuse vs. Silkypix direct highlight
recovery


  Hello Peter,

  very impressing example indeed! Seems like I should finally try this
  myself, since I normally shoot bracketed JPGs and suffer from things
  like moving clouds a lot :-)

  Regards, Philipp

  panovrx schrieb:
  > Here is an example of how extracting multiple EVs from a raw file
  > and using Enfuse on them to make a composite can give better highlight
  > recovery than standard raw software tools used directly.
  >
  > This is an crop from a jpg made directly with Silkypix from a raw file,
  > part of a pano sequence I shot today.
  > http://www.mediavr.com/desk.jpg
  > You can see the details on the papers on the desk are blown out, even
  > though I am using the maximum highlight recovery setting in Silkypix on
  > the raw file (and Silkypix has good highlight recovery -- not as good
  > as Raw Therapee or DXO maybe but still pretty good).
  >
  > Here is the same desk in the stitched pano ... using Enfuse on 4 EVs
  > images extracted with Silkypix from each component raw image (a single
  > exposure raw sequence). (-3EV, -1.5EV, 0EV, 2EV)
  > http://www.mediavr.com/judging.htm
  >
  > the highlight detail is a lot better in the Enfused pseudo hdr composite
  >
  > Peter
  >
  >
  >
  > ------------------------------------
  >
  >



 
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG.
Version: 7.5.519 / Virus Database: 269.21.8/1337 - Release Date: 20.03.2008
20:10


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Pseudo HDR Enfuse vs. Silkypix direct highlight recovery

AYRTON - avi
In reply to this post by panovrx
Very good sample !
THANKS for sharing Peter.
I'm, gonna try that too.
I'm always learning from you.

Cheers
AYRTON




On Mon, Mar 24, 2008 at 8:12 AM, panovrx <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Here is an example of how extracting multiple EVs from a raw file
> and using Enfuse on them to make a composite can give better highlight
> recovery than standard raw software tools used directly.
>
> This is an crop from a jpg made directly with Silkypix from a raw file,
> part of a pano sequence I shot today.
> http://www.mediavr.com/desk.jpg
> You can see the details on the papers on the desk are blown out, even
> though I am using the maximum highlight recovery setting in Silkypix on
> the raw file (and Silkypix has good highlight recovery  -- not as good
> as Raw Therapee or DXO maybe but still pretty good).
>
> Here is the same desk in the stitched pano ... using Enfuse on 4 EVs
> images extracted with Silkypix from each component raw image (a single
> exposure raw sequence). (-3EV, -1.5EV, 0EV, 2EV)
> http://www.mediavr.com/judging.htm
>
> the highlight detail is a lot better in the Enfused pseudo hdr composite
>
> Peter
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------
>
> --
>
>
>
>


--
------------
| A Y R |
| T O N |
------------

+ 55 21 9982 6313

http://ayrton360.com
http://rio.360cities.net
http://vrfolio.com
http://ayrton.com


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

RE: Pseudo HDR Enfuse vs. Silkypix direct highlight recovery

Sacha Griffin
In reply to this post by panovrx
Oh certainly, that looks very well done. I've been using a variant of e.
krauses actions for hdr for a couple years now. It's very similar to enfuse
except for some slight haloing if it push it too far.

Using enfuse, plus the actions, leads to an ultra-configurable exposure
technique yielding natural results.

With using 1 single raw, taken bracketed, you can select the right exposure
which preserves the important highlights, discard the rest, and then do your
pushing. For difficult outdoor scenes, there almost isn't any other way.

Except for FDR tools which can do the automatic difference map and still
blend in your other natural exposures. In photoshop, it's a bit of a pain to
create the difference layers/masks quickly.

 

Your conclusion is identical to my preliminary text of tufuse with jpg. My
only stopping point since tufuses update, is TCA from tufuse's  automatic
raw conversions. For a normal lens, tufuse should be really really
interesting.

 

I am thinking.. by examining the exposures of a bracket series.. perhaps
different weights could be placed on contiguous areas where the series
starts to clip quicker.

For example for a middle series bracket an exterior window will start to
clip, as opposed to an interior light. Normally, to get the exterior windows
down quicker, the whole scene must adjusted.

By examining which areas clip first, the rest of the scenes overall
brightness could be better preserved.

 

Manually, I had success with enfuse, and a dark exposure, then I masked out
the window, and then I did a channel mask and remove the enfused shadows on
the dark exposure. This created probably the most eye realistic exposure
combining an interior/outside scene I've done in while.

 

All in all, people are expecting HDR to make scene decisions for them, and
this creates some frustrations. But perhaps, the explained method might
begin to bridge the gap?

 

Sacha Griffin

Southern Digital Solutions LLC

http://www.southern-digital.com

http://www.seeit360.net

404-551-4275

 

 

 

From: [hidden email] [mailto:[hidden email]] On
Behalf Of panovrx
Sent: Monday, March 24, 2008 7:13 AM
To: [hidden email]
Subject: [PanoToolsNG] Pseudo HDR Enfuse vs. Silkypix direct highlight
recovery

 

Here is an example of how extracting multiple EVs from a raw file
and using Enfuse on them to make a composite can give better highlight
recovery than standard raw software tools used directly.

This is an crop from a jpg made directly with Silkypix from a raw file,
part of a pano sequence I shot today.
http://www.mediavr.com/desk.jpg
You can see the details on the papers on the desk are blown out, even
though I am using the maximum highlight recovery setting in Silkypix on
the raw file (and Silkypix has good highlight recovery -- not as good
as Raw Therapee or DXO maybe but still pretty good).

Here is the same desk in the stitched pano ... using Enfuse on 4 EVs
images extracted with Silkypix from each component raw image (a single
exposure raw sequence). (-3EV, -1.5EV, 0EV, 2EV)
http://www.mediavr.com/judging.htm

the highlight detail is a lot better in the Enfused pseudo hdr composite

Peter

 



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Pseudo HDR Enfuse vs. Silkypix direct highlight recovery

Sacha Griffin
I was thinking a more accurate weighting system, would be a system to
assign larger weights to darker exposures based on the pixels around
it. For example, your pupil will adapt to a large window much more
than a candle of the same exposure seen from across a room. This would
prevent alot of ugliness that enfuse gives to interior lights, and
small areas of highlights.

-s

--- In [hidden email], "Sacha Griffin" <sachagriffin@...>
wrote:
>
> Oh certainly, that looks very well done. I've been using a variant of e.
> krauses actions for hdr for a couple years now. It's very similar to
enfuse
> except for some slight haloing if it push it too far.
>
> Using enfuse, plus the actions, leads to an ultra-configurable exposure
> technique yielding natural results.
>
> With using 1 single raw, taken bracketed, you can select the right
exposure
> which preserves the important highlights, discard the rest, and then
do your
> pushing. For difficult outdoor scenes, there almost isn't any other way.
>
> Except for FDR tools which can do the automatic difference map and still
> blend in your other natural exposures. In photoshop, it's a bit of a
pain to
> create the difference layers/masks quickly.
>
>  
>
> Your conclusion is identical to my preliminary text of tufuse with
jpg. My
> only stopping point since tufuses update, is TCA from tufuse's
automatic

> raw conversions. For a normal lens, tufuse should be really really
> interesting.
>
>  
>
> I am thinking.. by examining the exposures of a bracket series.. perhaps
> different weights could be placed on contiguous areas where the series
> starts to clip quicker.
>
> For example for a middle series bracket an exterior window will start to
> clip, as opposed to an interior light. Normally, to get the exterior
windows
> down quicker, the whole scene must adjusted.
>
> By examining which areas clip first, the rest of the scenes overall
> brightness could be better preserved.
>
>  
>
> Manually, I had success with enfuse, and a dark exposure, then I
masked out
> the window, and then I did a channel mask and remove the enfused
shadows on
> the dark exposure. This created probably the most eye realistic exposure
> combining an interior/outside scene I've done in while.
>
>  
>
> All in all, people are expecting HDR to make scene decisions for
them, and

> this creates some frustrations. But perhaps, the explained method might
> begin to bridge the gap?
>
>  
>
> Sacha Griffin
>
> Southern Digital Solutions LLC
>
> http://www.southern-digital.com
>
> http://www.seeit360.net
>
> 404-551-4275
>
>  
>
>  
>
>  
>
> From: [hidden email]
[mailto:[hidden email]] On

> Behalf Of panovrx
> Sent: Monday, March 24, 2008 7:13 AM
> To: [hidden email]
> Subject: [PanoToolsNG] Pseudo HDR Enfuse vs. Silkypix direct highlight
> recovery
>
>  
>
> Here is an example of how extracting multiple EVs from a raw file
> and using Enfuse on them to make a composite can give better highlight
> recovery than standard raw software tools used directly.
>
> This is an crop from a jpg made directly with Silkypix from a raw file,
> part of a pano sequence I shot today.
> http://www.mediavr.com/desk.jpg
> You can see the details on the papers on the desk are blown out, even
> though I am using the maximum highlight recovery setting in Silkypix on
> the raw file (and Silkypix has good highlight recovery -- not as good
> as Raw Therapee or DXO maybe but still pretty good).
>
> Here is the same desk in the stitched pano ... using Enfuse on 4 EVs
> images extracted with Silkypix from each component raw image (a single
> exposure raw sequence). (-3EV, -1.5EV, 0EV, 2EV)
> http://www.mediavr.com/judging.htm
>
> the highlight detail is a lot better in the Enfused pseudo hdr composite
>
> Peter
>
>  
>
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>


Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Pseudo HDR Enfuse vs. Silkypix direct highlight recovery

dalileis-3
In reply to this post by panovrx
Splendid, Peter. Thanks for sharing that example. Was planning on
testing that myself, just to see how's Enfuse dealing with pseudo HDR
kind of raw input. Clearly sharp and steady. This would be the
preferred technique from now on then, shooting for Enfuse when the
variations in lighting conditions aren't very extreme or when there
are simply too many moving objects in the pano.

That aside, is that the real life Travis Bickle, to the right of the
table? Didn't know Scorsese/De Niro based him on the real life
character, now featured in your pano. ;)

http://youtube.com/watch?v=NMaTfAn7KAs&feature=related

"You taking the picture of me?"

"Well I'm the only one here..."

"I'm standing here, you make a move... you make a move..."

LOL

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Pseudo HDR Enfuse vs. Silkypix direct highlight recovery

Roger D Williams
In reply to this post by panovrx
On Mon, 24 Mar 2008 20:12:32 +0900, panovrx <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Here is an example of how extracting multiple EVs from a raw file
> and using Enfuse on them to make a composite can give better highlight
> recovery than standard raw software tools used directly.
>
> This is an crop from a jpg made directly with Silkypix from a raw file,
> part of a pano sequence I shot today.
> http://www.mediavr.com/desk.jpg
> You can see the details on the papers on the desk are blown out, even
> though I am using the maximum highlight recovery setting in Silkypix on
> the raw file (and Silkypix has good highlight recovery  -- not as good
> as Raw Therapee or DXO maybe but still pretty good).
>
> Here is the same desk in the stitched pano ... using Enfuse on 4 EVs
> images extracted with Silkypix from each component raw image (a single
> exposure raw sequence). (-3EV, -1.5EV, 0EV, 2EV)
> http://www.mediavr.com/judging.htm
>
> the highlight detail is a lot better in the Enfused pseudo hdr composite

This is very impressive. Until now I have not used Enfuse in this way,
and I can see one GREAT advantage... no problems with camera/object
movement between multiple bracketed exposures! I intend going back to
unipod shooting, and that necessarily involves more camera movement
than a tripod. And if there are people around, you always get object
movement.

I assume you absolutely must not overexpose the highlights, though, as
the detail can't be recovered if it isn't there in the first place.

I have Silkypix, and have been pleased with it, but found the whole
business of grappling with HDR too computer intensive. Enfuse freed
me from that, giving results as good as I could obtain by trial and
error using HDR, but brought its own problems. I must try using the
batch mode of Silkypix to produce a series of exposures in this way
and then combine them with Enfuse.

The only problem may be the high noise levels in my D200 if I try to
boost exposures for the shadow areas. Hmmm. Maybe it will be worth
swapping for a D300?

Roger W.

--
Work: www.adex-japan.com
Play: www.usefilm.com/member/roger
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Pseudo HDR Enfuse vs. Silkypix direct highlight recovery

Eric O'Brien
In reply to this post by panovrx
Now... just a minute!

If the data exists in the raw file, the fact that it can't be  
extracted/expressed all in one go would seem to be (in this case) a  
failure/limitation of "Silkypix."

It seems crazy to have to render 4 pseudo bracketed exposures from a  
single raw file, then run those through Enfuse simply to make visible  
the data that is ALREADY THERE in the original raw file.

Help me understand why the "problem" isn't simply a limitation of the  
raw conversion process.

eo

On Mar 24, 2008, at 4:12 AM, panovrx wrote:

> Here is an example of how extracting multiple EVs from a raw file
> and using Enfuse on them to make a composite can give better highlight
> recovery than standard raw software tools used directly.
>
> This is an crop from a jpg made directly with Silkypix from a raw  
> file,
> part of a pano sequence I shot today.
> http://www.mediavr.com/desk.jpg
> You can see the details on the papers on the desk are blown out, even
> though I am using the maximum highlight recovery setting in  
> Silkypix on
> the raw file (and Silkypix has good highlight recovery  -- not as good
> as Raw Therapee or DXO maybe but still pretty good).
>
> Here is the same desk in the stitched pano ... using Enfuse on 4 EVs
> images extracted with Silkypix from each component raw image (a single
> exposure raw sequence). (-3EV, -1.5EV, 0EV, 2EV)
> http://www.mediavr.com/judging.htm
>
> the highlight detail is a lot better in the Enfused pseudo hdr  
> composite
>
> Peter
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Pseudo HDR Enfuse vs. Silkypix direct highlight recovery

paul womack
Eric O'Brien wrote:

> Now... just a minute!
>
> If the data exists in the raw file, the fact that it can't be  
> extracted/expressed all in one go would seem to be (in this case) a  
> failure/limitation of "Silkypix."
>
> It seems crazy to have to render 4 pseudo bracketed exposures from a  
> single raw file, then run those through Enfuse simply to make visible  
> the data that is ALREADY THERE in the original raw file.
>
> Help me understand why the "problem" isn't simply a limitation of the  
> raw conversion process.

The "limitation" is that enfuse has clever tricks that silkypix doesn't.

Where this is a bug or a missing feature is a matter of philosophy.

   BugBear
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Pseudo HDR Enfuse vs. Silkypix direct highlight recovery

Milko K. Amorth
In reply to this post by Eric O'Brien
Hi Eric,

> Help me understand why the "problem" isn't simply a limitation of the
> raw conversion process.
The raw convertion is limited by you and the capacity of the raw file  
information in terms of bit depth storage,
the AD converter and sensor in the cam. Its a digital limitation. Anlog  
film has still more contrast range than any sensor can do.

If you convert a raw of a well exposed image at EV 0 your exposure has a  
certain contrast range. Highlights, Midtones and Shadows, which make up  
your image. With shifting the EV values in raw (range depends on the bit  
rate of the AD and sensor) you can increase the range. +EV recovers more  
shadow detail and -EV recovers more highlight detail. Hence exposes the  
areas not covered by EV 0 better.
By combining all well exposed areas in Enfuse (that is what <Enfuse> does-  
it uses only the well or best exposed pixels) You get an increased dynamic  
range close to film. With 12 bit slr you can get 4 EV and with 14bit cams  
you can get 6 EV ranges depending on your exposure within one raw  
file......now just add bracketing of raw to that and you can supercede  
analog film and get HDR.

Cheers, Milko




--
Milko K. Amorth
360° Immersive Imaging Productions

VRCanada.ca
Vancouver.360cities.net
Ph:604.561.5101
fx: 604.909.5125

Skype: VRdundee
Adobe Photographers Directory: tinyurl.com/2e3tnq
Flickr: flickr.com/photos/vrdundee/
Youtube: youtube.com/user/VRDundee Member of IVRPA.org  (International VR  
Photography Association): ivrpa.org/user/1133
Member of the Panorama Tools Meeting Group Europe : panotools-meeting.com/
Contributor to the WorldWidePanorama.com Project ( University of  
California Berkeley) : tinyurl.com/233lkg
Member of 360cities.net network VR portal

------------------------------------

--
<*> Wiki: http://wiki.panotools.org
<*> User Guidelines: http://wiki.panotools.org/User_Guidelines
<*> Nabble (Web) http://www.nabble.com/PanoToolsNG-f15658.html
<*> NG Member Map http://www.panomaps.com/ng
<*> Moderators/List Admins: [hidden email]
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/PanoToolsNG/

<*> Your email settings:
    Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/PanoToolsNG/join
    (Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
    mailto:[hidden email]
    mailto:[hidden email]

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
    [hidden email]

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
    http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Pseudo HDR Enfuse vs. Silkypix direct highlight recovery

Erik Krause
Administrator
On Tuesday, April 01, 2008 at 9:26, Milko Amorth wrote:

> If you convert a raw of a well exposed image at EV 0 your exposure has a
> certain contrast range. Highlights, Midtones and Shadows, which make up  your
> image. With shifting the EV values in raw (range depends on the bit  rate of
> the AD and sensor) you can increase the range. +EV recovers more  shadow
> detail and -EV recovers more highlight detail. Hence exposes the  areas not
> covered by EV 0 better.

...but you can extract the whole dynamic range in one go as well. A
procedure for ACR is described on
http://wiki.panotools.org/RAW_dynamic_range_extraction

You get awfully flat images this way, but you can tonemap them later
using Photomatix, FDRTools, Picturenaut or QTPFSGui, same as if it
was a true HDR file. And of course you can extract different
exposures and pass them to enfuse or tufuse.

The benefit of this process is that you can stitch a panorama with
such files and tonemap or enfuse later. This is of use, if the
blender chooses different blending seams, which would lead to
artifical ghosts...

best regards
Erik Krause
http://www.erik-krause.de

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Re: Pseudo HDR Enfuse vs. Silkypix direct highlight recovery

Milko K. Amorth
Hi Erik,

> ...but you can extract the whole dynamic range in one go as well. A
> procedure for ACR is described on
> http://wiki.panotools.org/RAW_dynamic_range_extraction 
> <http://wiki.panotools.org/RAW_dynamic_range_extraction>
>




Yes, of course. This tutorial is for bracketed exposures though. Which
would give even a greater dynamic range.
Eric's question was based on one raw file. The recovery from one raw
file is remarkable even with well exposed images.
I have done a comparison with an single image from Willy Kaemena from
the ne Nikon D300 here:
http://360image.de/test/d300raw_enfused.jpg
This image was well exposed for mid toes and shadows and the highlights
still recoverd well up to 4 stops. Note the skylight bar shadows.
This cam is remarkable and enfuse makes it even more remarkable
considering this is only raw exposure.



>
> You get awfully flat images this way, but you can tonemap them later
> using Photomatix, FDRTools, Picturenaut or QTPFSGui, same as if it
> was a true HDR file.
>




HDR, in my opinion is term far over used. When does HDR beginn? A couple
of stops over and under digital exposure? This is not HDR to me, but
rather LDR or an increased dynamic range.
Comparing some of the so called HDR to 'real' HDR (32bits per channel)
is not possible.
Tonemapping has been my door stopper in this. I never got good results
down mapping to 8 bits.

> And of course you can extract different
> exposures and pass them to enfuse or tufuse.
>


Right, that makes 'Enfuse' so natural.

>
> The benefit of this process is that you can stitch a panorama with
> such files and tonemap or enfuse later. This is of use, if the
> blender chooses different blending seams, which would lead to
> artifical ghosts...
>





Right. In some instances blend plane export to enfuse works well, in
some id doesn't
The great thing about the new ACR is you can introduce old panos in raw
and even push more out of them.
>
>  

Cheers, Milko

--
Milko K.Amorth
ph:604.561.5101
fx:604.909.5125

www.VRCanada.ca
360° Immersive Imaging
Skype: VRdundee

Check out the new release of Lucid Flash Viewer in HD!


Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Pseudo HDR Enfuse vs. Silkypix direct highlight recovery

panovrx
In reply to this post by panovrx
Here is another example:
regular single extraction with Silkypix with highlight recovery:
http://www.mediavr.com/curtains.jpg

result with -2EV, 0EV, +1EV enfused extracted (16bit) images:
http://www.mediavr.com/curtainsenfused.jpg

you can see the exterior is still blown out (as there was nothing
recorded in the original raw) but the curtains are much better

generally I notice an improvement much more with highlights than
shadows -- maybe if one really upped the shadow contrast in the plus
EV extractions there would be more detail

Peter
http://www.mediavr.com/blog




--- In [hidden email], "panovrx" <mediavr@...> wrote:
>
> Here is an example of how extracting multiple EVs from a raw file
> and using Enfuse on them to make a composite can give better
highlight
> recovery than standard raw software tools used directly.
>
> This is an crop from a jpg made directly with Silkypix from a raw
file,
> part of a pano sequence I shot today.
> http://www.mediavr.com/desk.jpg
> You can see the details on the papers on the desk are blown out,
even
> though I am using the maximum highlight recovery setting in
Silkypix on
> the raw file (and Silkypix has good highlight recovery  -- not as
good
> as Raw Therapee or DXO maybe but still pretty good).
>
> Here is the same desk in the stitched pano ... using Enfuse on 4
EVs
> images extracted with Silkypix from each component raw image (a
single
> exposure raw sequence). (-3EV, -1.5EV, 0EV, 2EV)
> http://www.mediavr.com/judging.htm
>
> the highlight detail is a lot better in the Enfused pseudo hdr
composite
>
> Peter
>


Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Pseudo HDR Enfuse vs. Silkypix direct highlight recovery

panovrx
And here is the -2EV extracted image with levels applied to bring it
back up to the normal brightness (without clipping)
http://www.mediavr.com/minuscurtains.jpg
-- the highlights look much the same as the enfused image but the
shadows and midtones are very flat

Peter


--- In [hidden email], "panovrx" <mediavr@...> wrote:

>
> Here is another example:
> regular single extraction with Silkypix with highlight recovery:
> http://www.mediavr.com/curtains.jpg
>
> result with -2EV, 0EV, +1EV enfused extracted (16bit) images:
> http://www.mediavr.com/curtainsenfused.jpg
>
> you can see the exterior is still blown out (as there was nothing
> recorded in the original raw) but the curtains are much better
>
> generally I notice an improvement much more with highlights than
> shadows -- maybe if one really upped the shadow contrast in the plus
> EV extractions there would be more detail
>
> Peter
> http://www.mediavr.com/blog
>
>
>
>
> --- In [hidden email], "panovrx" <mediavr@> wrote:
> >
> > Here is an example of how extracting multiple EVs from a raw file
> > and using Enfuse on them to make a composite can give better
> highlight
> > recovery than standard raw software tools used directly.
> >
> > This is an crop from a jpg made directly with Silkypix from a raw
> file,
> > part of a pano sequence I shot today.
> > http://www.mediavr.com/desk.jpg
> > You can see the details on the papers on the desk are blown out,
> even
> > though I am using the maximum highlight recovery setting in
> Silkypix on
> > the raw file (and Silkypix has good highlight recovery  -- not as
> good
> > as Raw Therapee or DXO maybe but still pretty good).
> >
> > Here is the same desk in the stitched pano ... using Enfuse on 4
> EVs
> > images extracted with Silkypix from each component raw image (a
> single
> > exposure raw sequence). (-3EV, -1.5EV, 0EV, 2EV)
> > http://www.mediavr.com/judging.htm
> >
> > the highlight detail is a lot better in the Enfused pseudo hdr
> composite
> >
> > Peter
> >
>


Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Re: Pseudo HDR Enfuse vs. Silkypix direct highlight recovery

Sacha Griffin
Thanks for the comparison. I'd say enfuse brings digital over the top, to
provide even better quality than an expert film photographer could do. Sorry
for my english. That almost make sense enough to understand.  :/
Has enfuse leaked to the normal photographer community or just us pano
heads?


On 4/4/08, panovrx <[hidden email]> wrote:

>
>   And here is the -2EV extracted image with levels applied to bring it
> back up to the normal brightness (without clipping)
> http://www.mediavr.com/minuscurtains.jpg
> -- the highlights look much the same as the enfused image but the
> shadows and midtones are very flat
>
> Peter
>
> --- In [hidden email] <PanoToolsNG%40yahoogroups.com>,
> "panovrx" <mediavr@...> wrote:
> >
> > Here is another example:
> > regular single extraction with Silkypix with highlight recovery:
> > http://www.mediavr.com/curtains.jpg
> >
> > result with -2EV, 0EV, +1EV enfused extracted (16bit) images:
> > http://www.mediavr.com/curtainsenfused.jpg
> >
> > you can see the exterior is still blown out (as there was nothing
> > recorded in the original raw) but the curtains are much better
> >
> > generally I notice an improvement much more with highlights than
> > shadows -- maybe if one really upped the shadow contrast in the plus
> > EV extractions there would be more detail
> >
> > Peter
> > http://www.mediavr.com/blog
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > --- In [hidden email] <PanoToolsNG%40yahoogroups.com>,
> "panovrx" <mediavr@> wrote:
> > >
> > > Here is an example of how extracting multiple EVs from a raw file
> > > and using Enfuse on them to make a composite can give better
> > highlight
> > > recovery than standard raw software tools used directly.
> > >
> > > This is an crop from a jpg made directly with Silkypix from a raw
> > file,
> > > part of a pano sequence I shot today.
> > > http://www.mediavr.com/desk.jpg
> > > You can see the details on the papers on the desk are blown out,
> > even
> > > though I am using the maximum highlight recovery setting in
> > Silkypix on
> > > the raw file (and Silkypix has good highlight recovery -- not as
> > good
> > > as Raw Therapee or DXO maybe but still pretty good).
> > >
> > > Here is the same desk in the stitched pano ... using Enfuse on 4
> > EVs
> > > images extracted with Silkypix from each component raw image (a
> > single
> > > exposure raw sequence). (-3EV, -1.5EV, 0EV, 2EV)
> > > http://www.mediavr.com/judging.htm
> > >
> > > the highlight detail is a lot better in the Enfused pseudo hdr
> > composite
> > >
> > > Peter
> > >
> >
>
>
>



--

Sacha Griffin
Southern Digital Solutions LLC
http://www.southern-digital.com
http://www.seeit360.net
404-551-4275


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Pseudo HDR Enfuse vs. Silkypix direct highlight recovery

John Vitollo-2
--- In [hidden email], "Sacha Griffin" <sachagriffin@...> wrote:
>
> Has enfuse leaked to the normal photographer community or just us pano
> heads?


Lightroom with an Enfuse plug-in works well:

http://timothyarmes.com/lrenfuse.php

Haven't used this one - Bracketeer:

http://pangeasoft.net/pano/bracketeer/


Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Re: Pseudo HDR Enfuse vs. Silkypix direct highlight recovery

aiwetir-2
bracketeer works great has sigma and mu sliders and a large live  
preview with detail preview and automagic image alignment too.

brian makes frequent updates and is very responsive


you get a panopreviewer license with it too


michael medina
http://pdxvr.com



On 04 Apr 2008, at 17:58, John Vitollo wrote:

> --- In PanoToolsNG@ yahoogroups. com, "Sacha Griffin"  
> <sachagriffin@ ...> wrote:
> >
> > Has enfuse leaked to the normal photographer community or just us  
> pano
> > heads?
>
> Lightroom with an Enfuse plug-in works well:
>
> http://timothyarmes .com/lrenfuse. php
>
> Haven't used this one - Bracketeer:
>
> http://pangeasoft. net/pano/ bracketeer/
>
>
>



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Re: Pseudo HDR Enfuse vs. Silkypix direct highlight recovery

Huy Hoang-2
In reply to this post by panovrx

Has enfuse leaked to the normal photographer community or just us pano
heads?















      ____________________________________________________________________________________
You rock. That's why Blockbuster's offering you one month of Blockbuster Total Access, No Cost.  
http://tc.deals.yahoo.com/tc/blockbuster/text5.com

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Re: Pseudo HDR Enfuse vs. Silkypix direct highlight recovery

Huy Hoang-2
In reply to this post by panovrx
I'm consider myself a normal photographer, and I found enfuse to be so excited, especially doing pseudo-HDR panorama with RAW files:
http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=745894


--huy


Has enfuse leaked to the normal photographer community or just us pano
heads?











      ____________________________________________________________________________________
You rock. That's why Blockbuster's offering you one month of Blockbuster Total Access, No Cost.  
http://tc.deals.yahoo.com/tc/blockbuster/text5.com

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

12
Loading...