Beakydave wrote:... you seem to say that it is not possible to produce an HDR image from any DSLR output, regardless of software, even if multiple exposures are taken?
David Kilpatrick wrote:Olaf is talking about the proprietary Photoshop 32-bit High Dynamic Range image format ...
David Kilpatrick wrote:... not the popular concept of the 'High Dynamic Range' picture - which he rightly identifies as being a wide dynamic range compressed into a normal one (8-bit depth, 16 million colours, 256 per channel etc).
David Kilpatrick wrote:To use Photoshop's current HDR - 32 bits per channel - two 16-bit conversions are needed, one of a dark image, one of light. Two 8-bit files are not enough.
David Kilpatrick wrote:I think the issue here is the difference between an extremely technical approach - creating a 32-bit file with a complete histogram even though no device known to man can reproduce this and the human eye can't view it - and making a dramatic pictorial image by combining highlight and shadow information which could not be captured simultaneously on film (or in a normal digital image).
01af wrote:Beakydave wrote:... you seem to say that it is not possible to produce an HDR image from any DSLR output, regardless of software, even if multiple exposures are taken?
No, that's not what I am saying.
Beakydave wrote:But you say no [...] digital camera is capable of 32-bit imaging.
Beakydave wrote:How then can one produce what you call a true 32-bit HDR from a camera that produces only 16-bit images?
Beakydave wrote:Or are you saying that if you combine two or more 16-bit files you can end up with full 32-bit image?
Beakydave wrote:I know that tweaking the 'exposure' of a single RAW is not the same as taking multiple bracketed exposures ...
Beakydave wrote:... (but sometimes the latter just isn't posible).
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest