| |||||||||||||
The Grumpy Editor's guide to HDR with LinuxThe Grumpy Editor's guide to HDR with LinuxPosted Mar 14, 2007 18:41 UTC (Wed) by k8to (subscriber, #15413)Parent article: The Grumpy Editor's guide to HDR with Linux
It would be really useful if someone familiar with the various tools could comment on the tone mapping in psftmo versus other available tools. Even proprietary ones.
For example the default Adobe Photoshop tool seems to produce very fakey-looking (painting-like) results almost all the time, and not prone to creating "realistic photo" type images. Photomatix is much further in this direction with almost completely automated creation of completely silly results.
One semi-pro photographer I know (not a nonsense term, he is actively retained and paid for his work, sometimes) has developed a happy relationship with FDRtools, although I haven't grilled him on the details.
Personally I would like to know if recommending windows and mac based photographers look at psftools is a good idea.
(Log in to post comments)
The Grumpy Editor's guide to HDR with Linux Posted Mar 14, 2007 22:21 UTC (Wed) by dhess (guest, #7827) [Link] For what it's worth, pfstools is sponsored by the Max Planck Institute, who've done lots of HDRI-related research and presented many times at SIGGRAPH and Eurographics. pfstmo, specifically, is maintained by Grzegorz Krawczyk of MPI. The pfstmo homepage explains exactly which tone-mapping algorithms it implements, along with a convenient URL that provides more information about each techniqueIf you'd like to get a feel for what pfstmo's operators can produce, there's a comparative gallery here:
http://www.mpi-inf.mpg.de/resources/tmo/NewExperiment/TmoOverview.html As far as I can tell, all of the operators that produced those images are available in pfstmo, except for Greg Ward's, which is probably available in the Radiance package (free for non-commercial use), if not in pfstmo. The gallery also links to a short paper which describes the parameters used to produce the images. As for recommending pfstools to photographers, I guess that depends on whether they're comfortable with command-line tools and possibly building their own packages (pfstools is not available in MacPorts, for example). If they are, then the availability of high-quality gratis tools is always a good thing, right? Kudos to MPI for making both their HDR research and their code freely available, by the way. It's a great set of resources for people interested in HDRI.
The Grumpy Editor's guide to HDR with Linux Posted Mar 14, 2007 22:28 UTC (Wed) by dhess (guest, #7827) [Link] There's another (incomplete) gallery comparing various TMOs, with links to more info for some of them, here:http://www.cgg.cvut.cz/~cadikm/tmo/It looks like a work in progress, but it already has some useful information.
The Grumpy Editor's guide to HDR with Linux Posted Mar 15, 2007 5:06 UTC (Thu) by k8to (subscriber, #15413) [Link] Thanks for the pointers. Probably as close as I'll get without doing the experimentation.
|
|||||||||||||