Does PSE5 do HDR?

[markinvictoria]

Hi...I've been using using PSE2 and now PSE5 for cloning, straightening, sharpening, etc. I've been trying to use layers with limited success. My question is does PSE5 do HDR? I'm pretty sure it must, then the next question is....How? Thanks for any help. I will be taking a PSE class at the local college in Sept. Maybe that will help. Mark O

[Codebreaker]

Not automatically if that's what you are looking for. You can of course take two or more images and blend them together manually.

As a simple example.....

1. Take two images - one exposed for Highlights, one exposed for Shadows.

2. Move the Highlight image onto the Shadow image - it will be on a layer above the Shadow image.

3. Mask or erase the shadow areas of the Highlight layer to reveal the correctly exposed Shadow layers below.

There are some other tricks which use a single image but this doesn't strictly give a higher dynamic range in my opinion since the range is fixed in the single image.


Colin

[markinvictoria]

Thanks Colin...I did try that method once and it worked quite well....I was hoping for something quicker and simpler. More practice would help...Thanks again....Mark O

[Codebreaker]

You'll need to move up to CS2 and later for HDR support.

Are you sure you really need to make HDR images? Have you tried using ND Grad Filters or are the areas of extreme tonal range too random?

Colin

[epaul6]

Mark Galer's PSE(Ver. #) Maximum Performance has an elements HDR work around. He uses multiple exposures and a layer mask filled with the image slightly blurred and a canned preset file(s) that he supplies on the accompanying DVD (note not a CD-much more lesson content).

Check it out at your local bookstore. The book itself is an intermediate text. He spends a lot of time on tonality, color correction, portraits, etc. It is written for those who want the very best from their photos so it can be a bit tedious if you just like to get things close. He used an advanced point and shoot camera (would do RAW) to take all his images. You may want to give it a look.

[tomlaronge]

FWIMBW, an investment of just under one hundred dollars will buy you your very own copy of the best for HDR, namely Photomatix and this works with PSE5 and CS3. If HDR is your thing, this is probably your best bet.

Tom

[jlwilm]

Tom,

If you have purchased this product, there is a new release - V 2.5 available for free (if purchased in the last year).

[Norwester]

I've seen some nice results folks have gotten with Dynamic Photo HDR also. For $39 I might give it a try.
http://www.mediachance.com/hdri/gallery.html

[Mack]

There is also a freeware version of Photomatix
http://www.hdrsoft.com/resources/features_basic.html
and another freeware HDR program you might check out
http://www.easyhdr.com/download.php

I have used them both but it has been a while and I would be hesitant to make recommendations. I found the process a little finicky but I would attribute that to a lack of experience.

Good luck and let us know and see!
Don

[tomlaronge]

John,
Mucho gracias. I do think this is one of the truly great products as it does its intended job very easily and very well.

Tom

[Steve Cat]

The answer is no.

Hdr, high dynamic range is 32 bits, PSE will display at most 16 bits.

Tone mapping's purpose is to bring this back down to 8, or 16 bits.

I don't believe monitors even display 32 bits, but at any rate mine doesn't and presents some unique challenges in editing/ tone mapping. What you see on the screen is not what you get once the down sampling/processing is complete.

One needs dedicated software CS2 has this. Photomatix has a stand alone program that "works" with any editor including PSE.

There are a bunch of HDR programs out there, most have free demos, one pretty good freeware program at qtpfsgui.sourceforge.net or some such thing.

[Codebreaker]

We shouldn't confuse Bit Depth with Dynamic Range. Using 32 bits instead of 8 bits will not result in a Higher Dynamic Range, it's just that programs like CS2 use 32 bit arithmetic to merge the exposures. However to optimise the use of a Dynamic Range we should use a high bit depth.

Dynamic Range in the case of a camera or scanners is it's ability to record or be sensitive to a range of blackest, blacks through to the whitest, whites. In other words its an analogue characteristic not a digital one. The points where clipping occurs because its either too dark or too light.

The bit depth determines how many levels or tones (Tonal Range) appear within this range. More bits the smoother the gradations across the range.

The whole process from capture to display/print has to cross many boundaries.

Firstly the Dynamic Range of the camera or scanner may well be different from the Dynamic Range of the display or printer.

To get a High Dynamic Range image displayed or printed on a Lower Dynamic Range device, tonal compression takes place to give the appearance of a wide dynamic range. If you're used to the concept of Curves in Photoshop then this is what you do when you apply a S shape curve for example.

Secondly, the bit depth or tonal range is also different. Cameras typically record the light intensities as 12 bits per channel. Conversion to JPEG requires reduction to 8 bits. Left as RAW you have 12 bits to play with and we know that Photoshop can process these as 16 bits (actually 15+1). Using HDR merging in Photoshop uses 32 bit arithmetic which then eventually gets mapped back to a 16 bit or 8 bit file for display or printing on an 8 bit device.

It can be hard to seperate the concept of Bit Depth and Dynamic Range but they are two different factors which can be independently processed.

Confusing eh!

Colin

[Steve Cat]

"Using 32 bits instead of 8 bits will not result in a Higher Dynamic Range"

You may be right.

[Steve Cat]

"Using 32 bits instead of 8 bits will not result in a Higher Dynamic Range"

You may be right.

Of course, my question would be then, why do it?

[Codebreaker]

Why do what - HDR?

The basic problem is the dynamic range of the sensor which causes problems in trying to capture sufficient detail in both the shadow and highlight regions.

Take one aspect that digital cameras suffer from - blown highlights. In other words clipping occurs to soon at that highlight end. Once you've blown the highlights they wont be retrievable.

So the basic concept in this case is to take two exposures. (More can be used). One for the shadows and one for the highlights. The Shadow exposure gives great detail in that region but has severly blown highlights. The Highlight exposure gets the detail in that region of the image but at the expense of the shadow detail, although this is not usually much of a problem. So between the two images they have a greater dynamic range than a single image.

Then do an HDR merge of the two images which gives the appearance of higher dynamic range. You get to see the detail in the highlights and the details in the shadows. Of course the trickery is that while you are merging the two images the result is still going to be displayed or printed on a device with a much smaller dynamic range. If not done correctly this can lead to images with all the detail at both ends but lacking in contrast.

Colin