Other Sites
Provides: Creation of HDR (High Dynamic Range) Images
Developer: HDRsoft
Requirements: Mac OS X v10.3.9, PowerPC G3 or Intel Macintosh, 200MB of hard disk space
Retail Price: $99
Classic situation: You are in a church with a beautiful stain-glass window. You want to take a photo but you realize you have to make a choice: you either take a slow exposure shot of the window, meaning that the rest of the image will be way underexposed, or you try to take a photo of the whole thing, leaving the window very overexposed, meaning you will not see any of the beauty of the window. What do you do? Well, normally you have to make a choice, because the sad reality of either film or digital cameras is that they have a very limited dynamic range. That's where Photomatix comes in and opens up a whole new world of photography for many of us who've tried in vein to get what is not possible otherwise. While this is a somewhat labor intensive process that includes a lot of post photography operations before you have your image, the end result is that you will get images that are simply not possible otherwise.
[Note: This is one part of a loose three-part review of Photomatix, Stitcher, and Nodal Ninja. Nodal Ninja is a device that holds your camera on a tripod at the entrance point, also known as the Nodal point. Photomatix lets you combine multiple exposures of the same shot to achieve a greater amount of dynamic range in the image. Nodal Ninja supports the camera on a tripod at the exposure point to obtain the best possible panorama. Stitcher can combine multiple images to create a panorama and can now create a panorama using HDR images from programs like Photomatix. These are three separate reviews but are related in kind.]
Below is one example of what I'm talking about. The image is a curious anomaly that shouldn't exist. Under all normal photographic capabilities, one cannot take a photo inside a dark place like a church and get the details of the shadows with the details of the stained glass window. The reason for this is due to limitation of dynamic range in photographs. Dynamic range is the range between the lightest and darkest part of any image. The amount of dynamic range we can see with our eyes is substantially greater (about 100,000:1) than what can be taken by a camera (film or digital) (about 1000:1) or displayed on a standard monitor (2000:1, some better some worse).
Simplifying somewhat, there is a relationship between the dynamic range and number of bits per channel. Your standard JPEG images are 8 bit images (or 2 to the 8th power) or 256 for each channel (grayscale is one channel, and if you have an RGB image, that's 3 channels or 256^3 (to the 3rd power) for 16, 777, 216). One way around this is with 16 bit images which have 48 bits per pixel for a color image and have a range of 65,536 for each channel. But still, that is an insufficient amount to properly hold all of the information necessary. Thus, one has to go into 32-bit images, or 96 bits per pixel for a color image. However, since they are coded with floating point numbers, they can have an unlimited number of values for each channel. Thus, to have a true HDR image you must have a 32 bit potential. [This does not mean that every 32 bit image is by definition an HDR image, but rather a 32 bit image can contain such an image. Just because you have a gallon container of milk does not mean you have a gallon of milk, it does mean you could have anywhere between a gallon to a drop of milk.]
The catch is no camera can take such a photo—at least not on one shot. Part of the problem is that camera manufacturers have to make a choice: do they want dynamic range or do they want contrast. If you showed a bunch of photos to a group of people, chances are the ones with greater contrast would be favored over those that tended to be a bit flat. With that in mind, as there is a limited amount of information that can be stored in an image, manufacturers have given the nod to contrast, not dynamic range. [This does not mean that such a camera could take a full dynamic range image in one shot, but it could get more dynamic range in one shot than what our cameras can do now.] However, such an image can be achieved by combining multiple images into one image, and that's where Photomatix comes in. [Photomatix is not the only way to create HDR images, Photoshop can do this as well. Later in this review is will do some comparisons between the two.]
On the day I created the church image below by taking 7 different shots with varying shutter speeds. After a bit of playing around and experimenting, I found that I got a result that I was satisfied with by using just 3 different (RAW) images as seen below. By combining these images into Photomatix, I then had a 32 bit image with a broad dynamic range.
However, there was still another big problem; my monitor, and the one you are probably looking at, cannot present a 32 bit image. That's where Photomatix's Tone Mapping comes in. In effect, Tone Mapping is the process where an image is flattened from a 32 bit image into either a 16 or 8 bit image that we can properly see on a standard monitor. This is a big deal because when you create your first HDR image and look at it you are probably going to be somewhat taken aback or even horrified as to what you might have done wrong. You haven't, and you'll see what I'm talking about a bit further in this review.
Let's go through the process: First set your camera to its lowest ISO. The dynamic range of a camera can be considered the range of too much light (over-saturation) to insufficient light (noise). Thus, any way you can avoid noise is very important. If you process noise through Photomatix, you will make a bad situation much worse. While most SLR cameras have extremely low noise in comparison to most consumer cameras, for HDR images you must shoot at the lowest ISO your camera has. It does make a difference.
Next, plan on having access to a Tripod. As stated, you need to take multiple exposures with different shutter speeds. As the shutter speed decreases, your ability to hold the camera sufficiently steady to not get motion blur decreases significantly. If the image of the stained glass window above had been blurry, the quality of the final image would have been compromised before I sat down to the computer.
If your camera has an AEB (Automatic Exposure Bracketing) setting, that may help create your multi-image collection. Set it to maximum extreme settings, under-exposed as much as possible, normal exposure, and over-exposed as much as allowed in the AEB setting. Also, if your camera has multiple shot capability (you press the shutter and multiple shots are taken), that's good to use as well. This way, after setting everything up, aim and press the shutter and three photos will be taken at three pre-set shutter speeds. If you are taking the photos outside in daylight, you probably do not need a tripod. But on a dark day (or deep shade) or inside, you will need a tripod. If you are taking a panorama, you are likely going to be encountering a wide range of light extremes (e.g., in and out of sunlight and shade). In these kind of situations, using AEB is probably not going to be a wide enough range and you will probably have to set the shutter speeds manually (the same settings) for each shot. If you are inside or in a low light situation, plan on taking a variety of shots. If you can look at your histogram in your camera, try to take shots at both extremes with several shots at two exposure stops separating the shots. If in doubt, take extra shots, and once you are back at your computer you can experiment to find the best combination to use. As you continue to experiment, you will get a better feeling as to what kind of shots you will need. This is a learning process. Also, if you can take your photos in RAW, all the better. You will need fewer shots to get good results (as opposed to JPEGs) as the RAW images have more information in them. [I also recommend practicing this before you go off on a vacation and/or a critical photo shoot so you have a better feel for what kind of shots are required to get the kind of results you want.]
Once back at a computer, I find working with Adobe Bridge (a freebie that comes with almost every Adobe program) a big asset here as it allows me to see all of my images and select the ones I want to use. Moving to Photomatix (finally), I have to say that their interface is strange, at best. There menu layout is not what I would have come up with, but alas, they did not check with me. To generate an HDR image, you need to move to the fourth menu over and select HDR -> Generate to get started. This is where you are given a small window with a Browse button to select the images you want to convert into an HDR image. You cannot drag images onto this window, you have to use the Finder's Browse control to access the image parts. Once all of the images you want are selected, you then get the window seen below that gives you controls as to how to process the collection of images. If you hand-held your camera there is an option to "Align source images," a good thing to have checked just regardless. In a similar vein, it's also probably a good idea to have the second option checked if you are outside where a breeze might be moving tree branches. If you are using RAW images, the next options are always grayed out. However, if they are JPEGs, TIFFs, or PSDs, a Tone Curve must be created for the images and this will be checked by default. Finally, if you are using RAW images, leave the White Balance "As Shot."
After you click on the OK button, depending on the speed of your processor, you will have to wait some time to a long time. With my G5 dual, I keep a magazine by my side as it can take a couple of minutes or more depending on the number of images I'm combining, especially if they are RAW (and therefore large) images. Then you are presented with a 32 bit image as seen in a 24 bit screen. It's not a pretty sight, as seen below. However, there is a small pop-up "HDR Viewer" that shows you sort of what your image looks like as you move your mouse along.
It's a good idea to save this image (with a ".hdr" suffix) because as you experiment in your settings to convert this to an image that can be seen on your monitor, you can always go back here to start the process, as opposed to having to create your HDR over and over.
Now comes perhaps the most bewildering part of the whole process: Tone Mapping.
Tone Mapping (also selected from the HDR menu), is the process of developing the image so that it can be viewed in a lower dynamic range device. In effect, it's flattening the image. When you bring up the Tone Mapping window, you are provided a range of sliders and controls across the left side. For the most part, that's it. But knowing which slider to move to do what is part mystery, part science, part guesswork. The manual helps somewhat, but overall, this is where you are on your own.
One of the brilliant things done in Adobe Camera RAW CS3 was to have each slider provide a visual clue as to what will happen when you slide it one way or the other. For example, the Temperature slider is blue on the left and yellow on the right, providing the user a clue that your image will be bluer as you slide to the left and yellower as you slide to the right. That sort of clue support is desperately needed in the Tone Mapping controls. The manual does provide some information, but I found the information somewhat ambiguous and lacking the guidance I felt I needed. After I had worked on a number of images and started to get a better handle on what to look for, the explanations did seem more clear. However, what is clearly needed is a recommended workflow. That is, first alter this, then this, and finally that. As it is, you'll tend to poke around back and forth as you try to narrow in on the final image. In short, get ready for a bit of a learning curve. Rather than go into the details here, I do recommend that you play with the controls and read the manual's guidance on these controls. Suffice it to say what is missing is a better explanation of what happens when you move the sliders one way or the other. Some are adequately explained; others, not so much.
But wait there's more. In addition to the creation of HDR images, you can also do batch operations. Let's say you went to some location and did a panorama of multiple shots. That is, three varied-exposure shots for each shot in a panorama. Let's say you have 10 shots for the panorama for a total of 30 images. Because these are a panorama, you knew you wanted consistent processing and had therefore set the camera to manual and only varied the shutter speed. What you need to do is to process one set of the images into an HDR and then perform a Tone Mapping on that image. However, instead of pressing the OK button when you are satisfied with the result, save the settings (probably in the folder with all of the images). Then, in Photomatix, go to the Automate menu and select Batch Processing.
As seen below, the Batch Processing window is fairly straightforward. On the top you can select to create HDR images with the same type of settings as done for an individual image. Just below that, you can select which type of Tone Mapping you want to use; here's where you can load the settings you just created in the previous paragraph. If you took three shots per photo (such as using the AEB) than you'd select the "Select 3 images at a time" option. If you are using 4 images, than select "4," etc. [This is another point where using Adobe Bridge is a very handy tool; you can look at your pre-processing images in rows of similar shots. You can scan down the rows to verify that you took the shots you wanted to take. If, for example, you inadvertently shot two of one of the settings, your rows and columns would not line up and you could easily trash the unnecessary image. If you find that you are missing an image, that's another problem, but at a minimum, you will not be having Photomatix processing images three at a time when you have one image too many or too few for the batch process.]
Curiously, the "Select [x] images" option is not sticky from one run to the next; if you close the window and open it again, this setting will revert to "All." Since most of the other settings are sticky, this one should be as well.
[Note: if you are creating HDR images to move into Stitcher 5.6, it is essential to click the "Don't Crop" checkbox. Stitcher must have images all of the same size—if an image is even 1 pixel smaller in any dimension, the process will fail.]
Meanwhile you can then locate which folder your images are in and where you want the processed images to end up (the default is to have them end up in a self-generated folder in the folder your images are in, as this works well and is efficient). Curiously you have to have a copy of the image in either a JPEG or TIFF format. Whether you use them or not, you will process them. Then, once all of the settings are determined, you click the "Run" button...and go have dinner. Depending on the number of files, the size of the files, and the number of photos for each final image, this could take quite a bit of time. The good news is that this is a very efficient process, and if you've done a good job in making sure there are no extraneous images bugging up the process, it's very successful. Once completed, the only way to get rid of the Batch Processing dialog box is to press the "Cancel" button. There is no "Done" button or any other mechanism to close this window beyond the "Cancel" button.
Another "But wait there's more:" Combining Images. As I've stated, you must have at least three images to create an HDR image. But what do you do if you only have two? Well, in Photomatix, you can combine them. This process is limited to JPEG and TIFF images; you cannot use RAW images when combining. Also, each of the five possible approaches (as seen in the list below) have limitations.
For a test, I used the two images below which show a common problem where you are limited in lighting conditions. The images present sharp contrast with the shadow region of the image and bright sunlight surfaces in the background. The images were not taken with a tripod, and that proved to be fatal to the first Combining approach.
Average: Takes your two open images and averages them. No dialog box and no option to align images. It's main advantage is that it is fast, but even ignoring the speed issue, image quality was dreadful.
Highlights & Shadows - Two Images: Again, this can only be done with two images but at least there is an option to Align the images before the processing.
Highlights & Shadows - Auto: Similar to the "H&S - Two Images," but this has the option of combining more than two images. Again, there are no options for any fine-tuning of the image.
Highlights & Shadows - Adjust: This approach, like the previous one, lets you use as many images as you think can help the final photo. This approach does provide some control, but the control is very limited. The Blending Point slider makes things lighter or darker, but that makes the entire document lighter or darker. There is no way to focus the action to the highlights or shadows. The Radius increases sharpening, but too much causes halos. It's best to leave this on the smallest number possible. The biggest problem with this control window is looking at the images and the changes taking place:. There are two options: 100% or fit in widow (Zoom Out). Your only option to scroll around the image when viewing at 100% is to move the X & Y axis sliders back and forth. A grab-hand tool is desperately needed for this window.
The "Highlights & Shadows - Adjust" approach let me keep a bit more shadows in the shadow region.
Highlights & Shadows - Intensive: Like the previous approach, this can also combine more than two images. Here, you also have a "zoomed" in view, but like the Adjust approach, you are limited to moving sliders back and forth to see various parts of the image as you test changing parameters. In addition, you can also change the size of the viewing area from 200x200 pixels to 500x500 pixels. On the other hand, any time you change any parameter (including zooming), you have to click the "Refresh" button to see the effects of the changes. There are two options for "Method:" Light provides less dynamic range but a more realistic image as opposed to Enhanced, which tends to be less realistic. The higher the Precision the less halo artifacts.
The Enhanced option takes a lot of time to process, but does give the best result. Look at the luster of the leaves and the greater detail of the crops on the left.
Regardless of which approach you use, the mere act of leveling dynamic range from multiple photos onto one photo tends to flatten the image and remove contrast. Every image created by Photomatix can take advantage of an "S" curve from Photoshop's curves. Below is the same image as above but after a simple "S" curve from the Curves adjustment in Photoshop for greater contrast.
One aspect about Combining is you occasionally have to test the images in different ways to see what looks best. Fortunately, you can use Batch Processing to process the Auto, Adjust and Intensive approaches so you can set this up and leave for whatever you want to do and let your computer work while you are not. Later, you can go back and pick and chose amongst the results to see what worked the best.
Finally, the last "but wait there's more" is Tone Mapping on an individual image in Photoshop. If you've used Photoshop's ability to create HDR images (File -> Automate -> Merge to HDR), rather than using PS's limited Tone Mapping ability, you can use HDRsoft's Tone Mapping right from Photoshop's Filter menu with the Tone Mapping plug in. In addition, if you have a RAW image (or good TIF/psd image) saved in either 16 bit mode, you can also select Tone Mapping from the Filter menu to try and get the best out of the image as you can. The Tone Mapping as a Filter (see below) is mostly the same as the Tone Mapping found in the HDR conversion process. Unfortunately, there is the loss of any magnification. The Tone Mapping plug-in varies significantly from Tone Mapping in the program as it is impossible to enter numbers in any of the selections. The best one can do is slide the sliders back and forth in hopes of nailing the number one might want.
The results were good (as seen below), but not as good as the Combine-Intensive.
Comparing the above image processed via HDRsoft's Tone Mapping plug-in versus taking the same image and processing it via Adobe Camera RAW's controls, one quickly sees that despite the great controls provided—such as "Fill Light"—when you try to lighten very dark shadows, it was impossible to not end up washing out the highlight regions such as the crop regions of the photo.
As stated, you can create your HDR images in PS and then Tone Map them using HDRsoft's Tone Mapping plug in. However, for my last test, I wanted to compare Photoshop's ability to create an HDR image and compare that to using Photomatix—both using Photomatix's Tone Mapping. While I was using two of the images showing the chimney from some house remains, I did have three images that I had used the AEB controls but hand-held the camera. Whether using Photomatix or Photoshop, either had align images built in. But, only one offers to remove ghosting artifacts.
From Bridge, I selected the three images and from Tools -> Photoshop ->Merge to HDR The process was automatic from there. I saved the image and used Photomatix's Tone Mapping plug in to achieve the images seen below. While Photoshop was able to align the main points of the image, it didn't make any attempt to remove the ghosting from the moving leaves.
Below is the same image set processed entirely from Photomatix, and, while no ghosting is seen, there is a strange under leaf artifact showing in the image (both blowups from the images above and below are at 100%). Any variations in the image beyond that are probably user variations.
There are many things to like about Photomatix. For one thing, I've had more fun with photography than I've had in a long time. Taking photographs that should not be possible but making them very real is a kick. I'm showing these photos to friends and asking them what's strange about these photos and they can't tell--then I ask them how many photos they've taken in a church where the window and pews could easily be seen, and then they go, "Waiiit a minute here..." Then they want to know how I did it.
But not is all rosy. As seen in the very last image above, there can be artifacts that can detract from the image. In addition, you really have to watch out for strange posterization that can show up in flat regions such as the sky. Fortunately, these can be dealt with. As seen in the screen shot of Photomatix's Tone Mapping below, you can see the strange artifacts caused by the wind-moved leaves, but you can also see an ugly blotchy region below the leaves. Note the Tab section of Tone Mapping window is in the "Micro" selection. If you move the Micro-smoothing slider to the right just a bit...
...you can remove the offending splotches. Notice that this does not appear to change the appearance of the leaves (any more than they already are).
If I have any bones to pick with Photomatix, it's that after working with the software for over two months I still do not feel I could instruct a class on how to use it. I can give guidelines and suggestions, but, in the end, the best I can suggest to anyone is to play with it and try to get a feel for what to do.
There is no doubt that the Tone Mapping functionality within Photomatix is substantially better than what Photoshop provides. Other than the ability to remove ghosting images (which doesn't exist in Photoshop) there is not much difference between the two in the creation of 32 bit (HDR) images. On the other hand, Photoshop has no ability to do any batch processing, and as HDR creation is a very very time consuming process, the ability to set up a group of images and let the computer process them while you go have dinner and/or watch a movie is a big, big thing.
Speaking of big things, one other requirement that you should have for processing HDR images is an external hard drive. My RAW images tend to be about 7 to 9MB each. A single HDR image from multiple shots can easily be about 30+MB each, and then, once tone mapped and saved, the size (saved as a TIFF) can range from about 20MB (if saved as an 8 bit image) to 80MB (if saved as a 16 bit image). Needless to say, this is one of the reasons that processing time can be long.
You may occasionally see references to how Photomatix has issues with creating strange colors. It's been my experience that if I did not provide to Photomatix a good range of images to work from, the more chance my HDR images would have this problem. In other words, the better the images you have going into Photomatix, the better the HDR image you will have going out. However, all that notwithstanding, notice how the books in the original church image seem to have a bit of an iridescence. All of my experimenting couldn't get rid of that effect.
In short, I like Photomatix a lot despite my frustration on its controls (I want a guided workflow and I want a better explanation about what each control does and what to expect when I push it one way or the other). Although the manual is frustrating, the HDRsoft website has excellent information about HDR images in general. I also want to again add that I've had more fun with HDR images than I can remember having with photography in a long time. I just wish I had a better handle on what I was doing.
Related reviews:
Applelinks Rating
___________ Gary Coyne has been a scientific glassblower for over 30 years. He's been using Macs since 1985 (his first was a fat Mac) and has been writing reviews of Mac software and hardware since 1995.
Tags: Reviews ď Audio/Video ď
Nice thorough review, but your pricing information is WAY off - Photomatix is $99, not $580.