HDR - PhotoMatix vs Dynamic Photo

[Kaotic Lazagna]

Tired as heck from my finals today, but I still wanted to play around with my new HDR software. These are using older pics of my car, but I wanted to make a new background for my laptop. Let me know which one you guys like better. Sorry if they're a little too big, let me know if you want them resized.

Dynamic Photo version:
http://i208.photobucket.com/albums/bb261/YarisKaos/HDRDynamicPhoto.jpg



PhotoMatix version:
http://i208.photobucket.com/albums/bb261/YarisKaos/HDRPhotoMatix3b.jpg

[YAR1S]

I like the first one better... the second one looks blurry and a little less intriguing... IMO.

[jinxor]

1st one is definately looking better

[TheUnGroomed]

The color of the Yaris in the Dynamic Photo picture seems to be a little better. But I had to vote for the PhotoMatix because of the compression.

[tuckevalastin]

neither's perfect but neither is bad... I vote Dynamic

[Kaotic Lazagna]

Photomatix because it doesn't compress the color range as Dynamic Photo, look at the sky and you will notice compression in DYnamic Photo.

Yeah, I noticed that, but I figured since I've only played around with it a couple of times, I still have lots to learn about the settings. May be I can get it to the point where the picture doesn't have those compression areas.

[Kaotic Lazagna]

The color of the Yaris in the Dynamic Photo picture seems to be a little better. But I had to vote for the PhotoMatix because of the compression.

I agree, and I think that's where Dynamic Photo is sort of a cheat. LOL. You can pick and choose which hue range(s) is more saturated individually. There's also manual aligning of the pictures in Dynamic Photo. But once again, I don't know as much about its settings as I do with PhotoMatix.

[Kaotic Lazagna]

neither's perfect but neither is bad... I vote Dynamic

hahaha. Yeah, my HDR's are not as drastic as PK's (could be also due to the fact I don't have those crazy scenery and sky like he does). :laugh:

[cali yaris]

Look at the sky in the first one. See the pixelation? It looks like it was saved as a GIF file (258 color maximum).

The second photo has smooth color gradients - more like a JPG file would.

You sure we're comparing apples to apples?

[Kaotic Lazagna]

Yup, Garm, both are JPEG's. I'm still getting used to the program that was used for the first one. :tongue:

[Kaotic Lazagna]

Another one using more recent pics:

Dynamic Photo:
http://i208.photobucket.com/albums/bb261/YarisKaos/BoatDockingHDR3DynamicPhoto.jpg




PhotoMatix:
http://i208.photobucket.com/albums/bb261/YarisKaos/BoatDockingHDR3.jpg

[Kaotic Lazagna]

That one came out too vivid, and I still can't manage to rid of the pixels. I guess I might just stick with PhotoMatix for that reason.

[NJBob]

Really it's "beauty is in the eye"...etc. Dynamic appeals to me more. Both are exaggerations of reality. And I also agree with Cali. :smile:

[ruimond]

I think the Photomatix one looks better, the Dynamic Photo one looks like it has a high contrast. Photomatix one has better colour in my opinion.

I just tried to edit one of my old photos in Photoshop, by just adjusting the exposures from -5 to 5 and saving invidual Jpegs. I used Photomatix like you have. Sorry to post the photo in your thread, didn't wanna start a new thread with it. Haha.

http://members.westnet.com.au/emax/yaris/hdr-yaris.jpg

[Kaotic Lazagna]

That came out pretty good. Dang you guys and your clouds! LOL.

[derickveliz2]

I vote for your car! LOL. :w00t:

If only we could mix them together :iono:

[yarisugi]

I just tried to edit one of my old photos in Photoshop, by just adjusting the exposures from -5 to 5 and saving invidual Jpegs.
Where in Photoshop can you adjust exposure? I might wanna try that.

[ruimond]

Where in Photoshop can you adjust exposure? I might wanna try that.

Your can do it through Image > Adjustments > Exposure. I'm pretty sure only the newer versions of photoshop have it.