12

The best method I have found is to shoot the moon when there is still enough light in the sky to narrow the dynamic range between the Moon's surface and the surrounding sky. A moon just a little past new can be shot shortly after sunset and exposed so that details are visible from the earthshine reflecting from the dark part of the new moon. Shooting an ...


11

With an image like this, the best and easiest solution is probably manual exposure fusion. It's easy enough to do in any raster graphics editor (GIMP, Photoshop, etc.). For example, here's what I managed to produce from your original images in a few minutes in GIMP: Here are the steps I used: Open both images as layers in GIMP, with the darker image (moon ...


9

Like comedy, it's in the timing. Shoot earlier in the day. This was taken in Southern California in December around 5:00pm. Moon. Blue sky. No need for HDR or exposure fusion or masks and layers. The moon is a very bright directly-sun-lit object. Treat accordingly. Canon XT/350D. EF 400mm f/5.6L USM. iso 100, f/11, 1/20s. Tripod and cable release.


7

Within the constraints you have specified, GIMP would be the best way to go. It is completely free and entirely Mac compatible. You do not need 'full' HDR software, you just need to be able to composite a properly exposed moon with a properly exposed foreground. Given the sharply defined edge of the moon, this is simplicity itself in GIMP. Simply take the ...


7

The problem is that you are trying to take a photo way outside the dynamic range of your camera's sensor, but within the (very wide) dynamic range of human vision. The moon is lit by full sunlight, but the sky by only a low level of diffuse light. You could try shooting earlier, when there is more light remaining in the sky, giving a narrower dynamic range ...


6

The first shot does not require multiple exposures, or any complex lighting set up, there's nothing to suggest it wasn't just window light from the left. Light from a large window on an overcast day is about as good as you ever get for this type of photography. The second shot could have been one exposure for inside and one for the outside as seen through ...


5

You are incorrect in the assumption that redundancy is a bad thing. A good HDR tool will be able to average the results of many images to reduce noise. Having more images also reduces the chance that there is movement in one of the images that will impact the result. A few points, DXO also measures dynamic range at each ISO setting. The NEX 5R has 13.1 EVs ...


4

The reason it makes sense to use smaller brackets is that you get better detail when dealing with a scene with less dynamic range. Any part of the range of the image that isn't used is wasted. You want to be sure your images are hitting the black and white points for maximum benefit. If an image only covers a 17EV range, then your best result will come ...


3

There is no lower or higher end of shutter speeds in the sense you seem to be using. Ie., there are technical limits for every camera, eg. 1/8000 to 30 secs., but if you reach those, you'll have to adjust another exposure variable anyway as you'll be shooting extremely dark/light subjects. The "auto" exposure will always be the middle of any exposure ...


2

"Exposure Fusion" just refers to a certain type of the tone mapping of an HDR image. It doesn't include all HDR tone mapping algorithms, and is rightly tagged as "HDR".


2

I realized after posting the question that I could do an experiment to prove or disprove the two claims in the question: That you can always take a burst separated by 3EV rather than smaller values. That it's enough to have two photos, rather than three, as long as they cover the dynamic range of the scene. Regarding the First Claim: I took a burst of ...


2

You are describing what we call in photo jargon “bracketing”. We choose our best guess at the correct exposure and then make a series of exposures. The idea is, we bracket the spot-on with one higher and one lower as to exposing energy. This can be accomplished by increasing / decreasing the working diameter of the cameras aperture. This can also be ...


1

A lot of real estate photographers I've known recommended Photomatix for its ease of use and more streamlined workflow compared to Lightroom/Photoshop. A lot of those guys have either moved on to other segments of the commercial photography market or adopted different practices outlined below. Photomatix is still available and supported from HDRsoft, company ...


1

Real Estate photography is part of my remit as a photographer and going by what I use, I can’t recommend Lightroom and Photoshop high enough. However, there are cheaper or even free options to get you started. Having previously also worked as a Wedding Photographer, the difference between the two types of images is immense. As a wedding photographer, it ...


1

If you want the one-trick pony, an HDR specialist, you should give Aurora HDR a try. Link is specifically to their architecture/real estate page. It can take a lot of the hard work out of it. It's better with bracketed exposures, but it's half decent just from singles if that's all you have. It has a tendency to over-push the colours, but you can drag it ...


1

Whether Exposure Fusion is a form of High Dynamic Range Imaging (HDR) or not depends on how you define HDR. If you have a broad definition of HDR Imaging that includes techniques that have been around since the 1850s when Gustave Le Gray first used parts of two differently exposed images to create photos of seascapes, then Exposure Fusion is a form of HDR. ...


1

I use enfuse for interior photography. I often find that you need to increase the fill and recovery sliders (LR3) before running enfuse. See the following images, first image is the final enfused image followed by 3 brackets 0/-2/+2


Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible