Thread: HDR Video - HDRx + Photomatix tutorial

Reply to Thread
Results 1 to 7 of 7
  1. #1 HDR Video - HDRx + Photomatix tutorial 
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Location
    Vancouver, BC
    Posts
    23
    Hey everyone,

    Iv'e been looking for an HDR Video tutorial for a while so I decided to do one myself. I wanted to share with everyone how to obtain an HDR look using REDCINE-X and Photomatix Pro. There are a few example videos that have been circulated in the past years and I was always fascinated by the process. It's my first tutorial, so hopefully it makes sense.

    Here's the example of HDR video using Photomatix Pro



    And here's the link to the full video tutorial.

    https://ramifilms.com/portfolio-item...ideo-tutorial/

    Thanks Everyone!
    Reply With Quote  
     

  2. #2  
    Senior Member Karim D. Ghantous's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Melbourne AU
    Posts
    1,706
    That looks so natural, which is rare in HDR imagery. Very well done and thank you.

    EDIT: I have a few follow-up questions, if you have the time.

    - Is the CA visible on the overexposed frames easily removed in software, even if the software doesn't know what sensor created the image? I assume so.

    - Knowing the amount of headroom in a RED file, could you have exposed this specific shot, without HDRx, so that the exterior is just within the sensor's bandwidth, and then simply brought the shadows up a little and the highlights down a little? I am guessing that this would depend very much on what ASA you're shooting at.

    - What was the EV difference in this shot?
    Last edited by Karim D. Ghantous; 12-17-2015 at 05:24 PM.
    Good production values may not be noticed. Bad production values will be.
    Pinterest
    | Flickr | Instagram | Martini Ultra (blog)
    Reply With Quote  
     

  3. #3  
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Location
    Vancouver, BC
    Posts
    23
    Quote Originally Posted by Karim D. Ghantous View Post
    - Is the CA visible on the overexposed frames easily removed in software, even if the software doesn't know what sensor created the image? I assume so.
    I'm not sure what CA is. Sorry. Can you clarify?

    Quote Originally Posted by Karim D. Ghantous View Post
    - Knowing the amount of headroom in a RED file, could you have exposed this specific shot, without HDRx, so that the exterior is just within the sensor's bandwidth, and then simply brought the shadows up a little and the highlights down a little? I am guessing that this would depend very much on what ASA you're shooting at.
    I could be wrong, but I don't think so. This specific shot was pushing the dynamic range of the sensor too much. I actually did get some pretty great results without using HDR but it's not quite the same. Having said that, color grading / correction is not my area of expertise so I would love to hear from other Red Users about this.

    Quote Originally Posted by Karim D. Ghantous View Post
    - What was the EV difference in this shot?
    Approx. 3
    Rami Mikhail - Director @ Rami Films
    Reply With Quote  
     

  4. #4  
    Senior Member Karim D. Ghantous's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Melbourne AU
    Posts
    1,706
    Quote Originally Posted by Rami Mikhail View Post
    I'm not sure what CA is. Sorry. Can you clarify?
    CA = chromatic aberration.

    Once again, thank you!
    Good production values may not be noticed. Bad production values will be.
    Pinterest
    | Flickr | Instagram | Martini Ultra (blog)
    Reply With Quote  
     

  5. #5  
    Senior Member AndreasOberg's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Leicestershire, United Kingdom
    Posts
    1,517
    Quote Originally Posted by Karim D. Ghantous View Post
    - Knowing the amount of headroom in a RED file, could you have exposed this specific shot, without HDRx, so that the exterior is just within the sensor's bandwidth, and then simply brought the shadows up a little and the highlights down a little? I am guessing that this would depend very much on what ASA you're shooting at.
    I use HDRx quite often on our MX sensor. Could be an interview situation where its bright sunshine outside behind the target.

    For these situations you have to use HDRx if you want to get everything exposed properly. The other solution would be to relight there scene so the inside is much brigther or darken the windows.
    I use Davinci to bring in both of the exposures. I'm a bit wary about Photomatix, its a cool program but I always felt that it destroys the images quite a bit and introduces new artifacts. It can create a nice look however.
    One has to remember that HDR is really "2 parts"
    - get everything exposed properly which normally means you move into the 32 bits per color range. Just because you shoot with HDRx giving you 2 differently exposed images doesnt mean it has to loo like "hdr" at all.
    - Tone mapping (and VFX). How you bring back all this data to 8 or 16 bit. This is really what creates the HDR look that is not always so flattering. However one can avoid this by being careful with tone mapping.

    Short answer HDRx, is really useful but it will take more time in post production and you will use more compression when you film.
    /Andreas
    www.ObergWildlife.com- Natural History Filmmaking
    www.WildlifeRescueMovie.com- Saving the animals of the Rainforest!
    RED DSCM2 8K Helium Movi Pro Gimbal, Inspire 2 X7, OConnor 2560, Canon CN20x50 50-1000mm
    Reply With Quote  
     

  6. #6  
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Location
    Vancouver, BC
    Posts
    23
    Quote Originally Posted by AndreasOberg View Post
    I use HDRx quite often on our MX sensor. Could be an interview situation where its bright sunshine outside behind the target.

    Thanks Andreas

    For these situations you have to use HDRx if you want to get everything exposed properly. The other solution would be to relight there scene so the inside is much brigther or darken the windows.
    I use Davinci to bring in both of the exposures. I'm a bit wary about Photomatix, its a cool program but I always felt that it destroys the images quite a bit and introduces new artifacts. It can create a nice look however.
    One has to remember that HDR is really "2 parts"
    - get everything exposed properly which normally means you move into the 32 bits per color range. Just because you shoot with HDRx giving you 2 differently exposed images doesnt mean it has to loo like "hdr" at all.
    - Tone mapping (and VFX). How you bring back all this data to 8 or 16 bit. This is really what creates the HDR look that is not always so flattering. However one can avoid this by being careful with tone mapping.

    Short answer HDRx, is really useful but it will take more time in post production and you will use more compression when you film.
    /Andreas
    Good stuff. That makes sense. I personally don't have much experience with all the necessary steps to generate a nice image using these steps. I found that using photomatix works nicely for me. Maybe I should learn how to use DaVinci properly. Having said that, I don't really find that the results I get from Photomatix Pro are that bad and if done properly, it does look fairly natural. I mainly shoot for web

    Do you have any recommendations / resources on how to do this process using Davinci?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  7. #7  
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2019
    Posts
    2
    Thanks so much. We've been looking for a good HDR tutorial.

    Brice Kelly from https://www.tetrafilms.ca
    Reply With Quote  
     

Tags for this Thread

View Tag Cloud

Posting Permissions
  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts