Jump to content
SAU Community

Pseudo Hdr's

Lepperfish

By Lepperfish,
in Photography

 Share

Recommended Posts

ZENNON Grand Master

ZENNON

Posted
Posted
Hey guys. If taking shots and you know your going to be taking pseudo HDR images would it be better to shoot them 1 or 2 stops higher exposure to avoid noise when adjusting exposure in photoshop? Or do you need that range of -2 -1 0 1+ 2+

If you are taking a single shot and you know you are going to make a single image HDR out of it yeah a stop or so brighter might be better as there is more info stored in brighter pixels.. little hard to explain but its called shooting to the right (you can read this if you are interested).

But yeah the important thing is the expose it so you capture the detail in the dark and bright areas - and in some cases this will simply not be possible with a single exposure - and then.. you'll have to do a proper HDR!

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/322997-pseudo-hdrs/#findComment-5266423
Share on other sites
MaTBoY Grand Master

MaTBoY

Posted
Posted

Why would you take 1 pic for a hdr image? If your intentionally wanting an HDR image and you're already there with your camera... why not take the extra shots?

I guess the only place you'd do it is if you took a pic, and thought it might look good as as afterthought, but if that's the case you're probably not going to get what you're after or had in mind anyway... Seems like a redundant thing to do.

It's hard to make an HDR pic not look flat and boring and lifeless as it is. Sounds like a Pseudo waste of time.

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/322997-pseudo-hdrs/#findComment-5266487
Share on other sites
ZENNON Grand Master

ZENNON

Posted
Posted
Why would you take 1 pic for a hdr image?

Might be a scene with heaps of moving objects and stuff

It's hard to make an HDR pic not look flat and boring and lifeless as it is. Sounds like a Pseudo waste of time.

I don't think so Matt. Due to the nature of a HDR you will loose dark shadows and bright highlights. So to make photo not look flat you have to fix this afterwards. This is not hard to do if you have something like Lightroom. Its simply a matter of opening the tone curve and darkening the shadows - (drag left hand side down a little) and making the highlights a little brighter (drag light hand side a little up)

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/322997-pseudo-hdrs/#findComment-5266639
Share on other sites
MaTBoY Grand Master

MaTBoY

Posted
Posted

hdr in motion! good call

I don't mean they're flat as in just how they're coloured and lit, i meant more in general, I'd prefer a good normal pic to a good hdr 9/10. Occasionally they're awesome and do a great job, but usually it just seems to take away from what ever was the reason you stopped to take a pic. personal preference i guess. :)

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/322997-pseudo-hdrs/#findComment-5266670
Share on other sites
ZENNON Grand Master

ZENNON

Posted
Posted
hdr in motion! good call

I don't mean they're flat as in just how they're coloured and lit, i meant more in general, I'd prefer a good normal pic to a good hdr 9/10. Occasionally they're awesome and do a great job, but usually it just seems to take away from what ever was the reason you stopped to take a pic. personal preference i guess. ;)

+1111

IMO a good HDR is one you can't really tell it is a HDR!

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/322997-pseudo-hdrs/#findComment-5266775
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share
Go to topic listing


  • Latest Posts

    • Kinkstaah
      Mistakes were made, my R34 Story

      By Kinkstaah · Posted

      God damnit. The only option I actually have in the software is the one that is screenshotted. I am glad that I at least got it right... for those two points. Would it actually change anything if I chose/used 80C and 120C as the two points instead? My brain wants to imagine the formula put into HPtuners would be the same equation, otherwise none of this makes sense to me, unless: 1) The formula you put into VCM Scanner/HPTuners is always linear 2) The two points/input pairs are only arbitrary to choose (as the documentation implies) IF the actual scaling of the sensor is linear. then 3) If the scaling is not linear, the two points you choose matter a great deal, because the formula will draw a line between those two points only.
    • GTSBoy
      Mistakes were made, my R34 Story

      By GTSBoy · Posted

      Nah, that is hella wrong. If I do a simple linear between 150°C (0.407v) and 50°C (2.98v) I get the formula Temperature = -38.8651*voltage + 165.8181 It is perfectly correct at 50 and 150, but it is as much as 20° out in the region of 110°C, because the actual data is significantly non-linear there. It is no more than 4° out down at the lowest temperatures, but is is seriously shit almost everywhere. I cannot believe that the instruction is to do a 2 point linear fit. I would say the method I used previously would have to be better.
    • GTSBoy
      DeAgostini 1/8 scale BNR32 Nissan Skyline GT-R Nismo

      By GTSBoy · Posted

      That's hilariously putrid!
    • GTSBoy
      R33 Fuel Pump & Brakes after alarm swap

      By GTSBoy · Posted

      When I said "wiring diagram", I meant the car's wiring diagram. You need to understand how and when 12V appears on certain wires/terminals, when 0V is allowed to appear on certain wires/terminals (which is the difference between supply side switching, and earth side switching), for the way that the car is supposed to work without the immobiliser. Then you start looking for those voltages in the appropriate places at the appropriate times (ie, relay terminals, ECU terminals, fuel pump terminals, at different ignition switch positions, and at times such as "immediately after switching to ON" and "say, 5-10s after switching to ON". You will find that you are not getting what you need when and where you need it, and because you understand what you need and when, from working through the wiring diagram, you can then likely work out why you're not getting it. And that will lead you to the mess that has been made of the associated wires around the immobiliser. But seriously, there is no way that we will be able to find or lead you to the fault from here. You will have to do it at the car, because it will be something f**ked up, and there are a near infinite number of ways for it to be f**ked up. The wiring diagram will give you wire colours and pin numbers and so you can do continuity testing and voltage/time probing and start to work out what is right and what is wrong. I can only close my eyes and imagine a rat's nest of wiring under the dash. You can actually see and touch it.
    • Kinkstaah
      Mistakes were made, my R34 Story

      By Kinkstaah · Posted

      So I found this: https://www.efihardware.com/temperature-sensor-voltage-calculator I didn't know what the pullup resistor is. So I thought if I used my table of known values I could estimate it by putting a value into the pullup resistor, and this should line up with the voltages I had measured. Eventually I got this table out of it by using 210ohms as the pullup resistor. 180C 0.232V - Predicted 175C 0.254V - Predicted 170C 0.278V - Predicted 165C 0.305V - Predicted 160C 0.336V - Predicted 155C 0.369V - Predicted 150C 0.407V - Predicted 145C 0.448V - Predicted 140C 0.494V - Predicted 135C 0.545V - Predicted 130C 0.603V - Predicted 125C 0.668V - Predicted 120C 0.740V - Predicted 115C 0.817V - Predicted 110C 0.914V - Predicted 105C 1.023V - Predicted 100C 1.15V 90C 1.42V - Predicted 85C 1.59V 80C 1.74V 75C 1.94V 70C 2.10V 65C 2.33V 60C 2.56V 58C 2.68V 57C 2.70V 56C 2.74V 55C 2.78V 54C 2.80V 50C 2.98V 49C 3.06V 47C 3.18V 45C 3.23V 43C 3.36V 40C 3.51V 37C 3.67V 35C 3.75V 30C 4.00V As before, the formula in HPTuners is here: https://www.hptuners.com/documentation/files/VCM-Scanner/Content/vcm_scanner/defining_a_transform.htm?Highlight=defining a transform Specifically: In my case I used 50C and 150C, given the sensor is supposedly for that. Input 1 = 2.98V Output 1 = 50C Input 2 = 0.407V Output 2 = 150C (0.407-2.98) / (150-50) -2.573/100 = -0.02573 2.98/-0.02573 + 47.045 = 50 So the corresponding formula should be: (Input / -0.02573) + 47.045 = Output.   If someone can confirm my math it'd be great. Supposedly you can pick any two pairs of the data to make this formula.
×
×
  • Create New...