[jforkner]

Here's a link to my latest work: http://www.caltel.com/~jforkner/photos.html

The images were combined in Photoshop CS3, then tonemapped in Photomatix Pro 3.0. Comments welcome.


Jack

[Biwa]

I really like the vally and the stream ones.
Would have been cool to see close up of the stump .

[palms1]

Jack that is some nice work (and shots) If i had to pick a favorite it would be the viaduct one with the blue flower , but then again it may be the panoramics !
May i ask why you combine in cs3 and not do it all in photomatix ? ( sorry just curious)

Palms

[jforkner]

Palms,

I found that Photomatix did not accurately align the three images I use to create the HDRs---the resulting "combined" image looked slightly out-of-focus. In discussing the problem with the folks Photomatix, they suggested combining the images in Photoshop, then tonemapping in Photomatix. I tried it, and found the resulting combined images were sharper when done this way. I also found that Photomatix does a better job than Photoshop at tonemapping, hence my workflow.

I'm not sure why the problem occurs, but I'm pleased with the results. BTW, I'm using RAW images shot with an Olympus E500.


Jack

[palms1]

Originally Posted by jforkner

Palms,

I found that Photomatix did not accurately align the three images I use to create the HDRs---the resulting "combined" image looked slightly out-of-focus. In discussing the problem with the folks Photomatix, they suggested combining the images in Photoshop, then tonemapping in Photomatix. I tried it, and found the resulting combined images were sharper when done this way. I also found that Photomatix does a better job than Photoshop at tonemapping, hence my workflow.

I'm not sure why the problem occurs, but I'm pleased with the results. BTW, I'm using RAW images shot with an Olympus E500.


Jack

Thank you for the info Jack , useful to know i am sure others will be interested too, look forward to seeing more of your work

Palms

[rab3rd]

excellent work..Very well done HDR's not over done like many you see.

[jforkner]

Thanks for the nice comments.

Jack

[TreesOfMyTime]

Originally Posted by jforkner

Thanks for the nice comments.

Jack

Jack:

How do you feel about the usual negative comments on the degree to which someone tone maps their image? I tend to look at them, the images, all for what they are, . . that persons artistic POV on that image.

But this subject seems to raise a lot of negatives and I can't understand why that is.

[jforkner]

Don,

I’m not sure if you’re asking how I feel about the comments themselves, or the reason they’re being made. Soooooo…I’ll try to answer both.

First, everyone is entitled to his or her opinion of a piece of work, positive or negative. After all, it is an opinion, not necessarily a statement of fact. I try to learn from the negatives, and perpetuate the positives.

I think the negative remarks are being made because too much “cooking” with tone mapping can make the resulting image look artificial (i.e., more like a drawing than a photograph). That’s not necessarily a bad thing if that’s the look you want. But if you’re trying to retain the impression of a photograph, I think the tone mapping needs to be tempered.

Most of the HDR images I see are too artificial looking for my taste. But that’s just me. I’ve seen lots of HDR images that are great in terms of composition, color, and visual impact; but no longer look like a photograph. I can appreciate the work for what it is, but it’s not what I’m trying to achieve with my pictures. I work very hard in trying to prevent the “overcooking,” and try my best to keep an image looking like a photograph. For me, the beauty of HDR processing is the ability to show details in the shadows without blowing out the highlights.

FWIW, I’ve added some recent images to my website, referenced above---they’re all HDRs. Hopefully, I’m achieving my goal.


Jack

[TreesOfMyTime]

Jack:

I think your work is frankly, stunning. I love most HDR work and yours is outstanding! I love, especially, the falls creek image, which is fairly heavily processed. I have no problem with an image that has been "cooked" to the point that it becomes "un-photographic" if it still appeals to me.

Keep adding to your site. I love it!

Originally Posted by jforkner

Don,

I’m not sure if you’re asking how I feel about the comments themselves, or the reason they’re being made. Soooooo…I’ll try to answer both.


Jack

[palms1]

Jack some nice additions there, super work

Don I know where you are coming from about peoples views about hdr/tonemapping but in the end it is down to personal taste Just some people would rather rubbish a technique than just say they personally do not like that style. It happens across the whole subject of retouching/manipulation.

Palms