The D90 can only do 3 shot bracketing but some other cameras can do 5 shoot bracketing. That’s 3 photos of the same subject bracketed, one underexposed, one overexposed, and one perfectly exposed. Some might say why would you need to just use one raw file anyway? Well real HDR is done using your cameras bracketing.
I know a lot of HDR purest out there will disagree and say that’s not real HDR but that's OK, it still works and looks great…So I’m going to try to show you how to accomplish this. My answer is sure you can! I've created some pretty nice HDR photos from a single Raw (NEF) file. Because all images are "normal dynamic range" when they're displayed, it's impossible to tell if it was shot from an HDR source, where as anyone can spot an ultra tone-mapped image from 100 miles away.I get asked a lot if you can make an HDR photo from a single raw file. I like to try and keep the record straight though because I feel that the differences are important, and I think it also makes it harder for folks to understand if HDR and tone mapping aren't clearly seperated. Yes, we do see "HDR" images labeled as such all the time (bit of a hobby horse of mine to be honest). I see images labelled as HDR all the time to my eyes many are just too cartoon-like in their effect my images above are (for me) right on that limit between what I consider to be photography and what is art.Hi Colin, DxO Optics Pro is a more general processing package and offers this effect as one of the multitude possibilities.
Thanks Colin - I have very limited knowledge of HDR - I know that it usually involves merging multiple shots and that specialist software is available. The 'HDR - Single Shot' feature was new in version 6 and this is the first time I've used it. For example, I can push my ageing Nikon D200 to ISO1600, knowing that DxO will deal with the noise and give me perfectly acceptable images. no dodge / burn) but it does offer specific optical corrections for each lens (assuming there is a module) together with great noise reduction possibilities. It doesn't have the range of functions of Photoshop (e.g. There are a number of presets for the RAW conversion and these are all customisable and can then be saved for future use.
I'm very happy with this software it isn't the most intuitive package but the results are worth the effort. I process all of my RAW images using DxO it works through 'modules' for specific camera bodies and lenses, close to 5,000 combinations available. Like many I'm waiting for the early adopters to find the glitches and for DxO to sort them out. I note that version 7 launched last week. I've been using DxO Optics Pro since late 2006 (version 4). Let us know what you think of it once you have used it for a bit longer.Hi John, Never used this package before but looking online it seems a fair price. I like the effect in both pictures, especially the water in the 2nd image (pool). I see images labelled as HDR all the time to my eyes many are just too cartoon-like in their effect my images above are (for me) right on that limit between what I consider to be photography and what is art. It's not really an "HDR Effect" HDR is a technique for capturing a dynamic range thats greater than can be captured in a single exposure without additional equipment like GND filters, so there's really no such thing as an "HDR look", (although the term is commonly mis-used) - so what you really have here is what's called an "ultra tone mapped" look, where the tones within a normal range exposure are agressively re-mapped to produce a (normally) highly vibrant / high contrast image.Thanks Colin - I have very limited knowledge of HDR - I know that it usually involves merging multiple shots and that specialist software is available. Welcome to CiC - great to have you with us.