Luminous Landscape Forum

Raw & Post Processing, Printing => Digital Image Processing => Topic started by: Alan Matuka on October 19, 2013, 04:43:43 am

Title: Photomatix - is it the best one ?
Post by: Alan Matuka on October 19, 2013, 04:43:43 am
I read several topics about hdr software, but still can't quite decide which one to get.
So far I used tried Photomatix, PS5 and one other I haven't been impressed with. Several people recommended Photomatix as the best option, what do you think ?

Thank you  :)
Title: Re: Photomatix - is it the best one ?
Post by: Bart_van_der_Wolf on October 19, 2013, 05:13:20 am
I read several topics about hdr software, but still can't quite decide which one to get.
So far I used tried Photomatix, PS5 and one other I haven't been impressed with. Several people recommended Photomatix as the best option, what do you think ?

Hi Alan,

I prefer SNS-HDR Pro (http://www.sns-hdr.com/) for natural looking HDRI tonemapping. Tonemapping of HDRIs has improved a lot in Photoshop CS6 with the introduction of Process version 2012, which can handle floating point TIFF composites, but it is still not as good as SNS-HDR Pro (a new version (2.0) is expected this month or soon after that, according to it's author).

I find that Photomatix has improved a lot over the years, but it is still too easy to produce completely over-the-top abominations. I prefer realistic renderings, which can then still be tweaked into a more abstract version if needed.

There are other contenders as well, but none of them performed as well a SNS-HDR Pro in my experience. Oloneo PhotoEngine appears to have had a very close look at SNS-HDR when they made that application, but it produced halo artifacts at high contrast window edges, last time I looked at it. It's also more expensive than SNS-HDR Pro. The HDR Expose program from Unified Colors looks promising for realistic looking work, but the versions I have tried had substandard HDR compositing functionality and were very slow in their rendering, compared to the real-time screen updates of SNS-HDR.

Cheers,
Bart

P.S. I just saw that they've improved the anti-ghosting functionality of HDR Expose with version 3. I do not know how well that functions.
Title: Re: Photomatix - is it the best one ?
Post by: PhotoEcosse on October 19, 2013, 11:30:04 am
My favourite - by quite a long way - is Nik's HDR EfexPro2, used directly from within Lightroom.

The game-changer for me, compared to Photomatix, is the ability to apply not only different amounts of HDR processing but also different modes of HDR processing to different parts of the image using the control point technology.

That said, I should confess that my aim with HDR is normally only to compensate for the DR deficiencies of digital camera sensors (Nikon D800 in my case), rather than to create "special effects", But I believe that, if effects were your bag, then you would find it easier to avoid overkill in the Nik product.

I think that you probably could achieve a similar degree of localised control with Photomatix if you created multiple HDR layers in CS6 and then differentially blended them - but (as with most of Nik's products) a job that takes maybe 2 minutes in HDR EfexPro2 could take 10 minutes or more in Photoshop/Photomatix.
Title: Re: Photomatix - is it the best one ?
Post by: Bart_van_der_Wolf on October 19, 2013, 12:20:18 pm
My favourite - by quite a long way - is Nik's HDR EfexPro2, used directly from within Lightroom.

The game-changer for me, compared to Photomatix, is the ability to apply not only different amounts of HDR processing but also different modes of HDR processing to different parts of the image using the control point technology.

Hi,

From what I've seen, testing myself and renderings from others, with HDR-Efex Pro there is still a tendency towards halo formation, due to the way that the U-point technology creates masks.

Other programs also offer local manual adjustments. SNS-HDR Pro offers layers with (smart) masking capability which can be saved for additional adjustments at a later stage, Expose 3 offers Dodge and Burn brushes during the tonemapping session.

Cheers,
Bart
Title: Re: Photomatix - is it the best one ?
Post by: paulziets on October 19, 2013, 12:25:43 pm
Alan,
Give the trial version of SNS Pro a go. You will be pleasantly surprised.
Title: Re: Photomatix - is it the best one ?
Post by: Kevin Raber on October 19, 2013, 12:39:15 pm
While I have used and like Nik and PhotoMatix I have recently been using a new program called HDR Expose 3.  I am doing a review of this software for this site.  Once you get the hang of it this software has some very powerful features and produces a very natural result.  You can see more at Unified Color (http://www.unifiedcolor.com/products/hdr-expose-3).  I'll have a review posted towards the end of November.  What I have experienced and the workflow is very impressive. 

Kevin Raber
Title: Re: Photomatix - is it the best one ?
Post by: Misirlou on October 19, 2013, 12:42:29 pm
I'll put in a vote for Oloneo Photo Engine, and for very little cost, try LREnfuse (if you use Lightroom). But, I've also gotten good results from Photomatx and Nik's product too.
Title: Re: Photomatix - is it the best one ?
Post by: Hening Bettermann on October 19, 2013, 01:42:22 pm
SNS-HDR has disappointed me by introducing a purple cast in the sky. It may be possible to tweak this, but ImageFuser (Mac) gives me unchanged colors right out of the box, see image at at left. Donation ware.
Title: Re: Photomatix - is it the best one ?
Post by: Bart_van_der_Wolf on October 19, 2013, 01:49:53 pm
I'll have a review posted towards the end of November.  What I have experienced and the workflow is very impressive.

Hi Kevin,

As someone involved with HDR tonemapping for many moons (more than a decade in fact) already, I'm looking forward to the review. Although not your intention for that single product review, it would be interesting if you could spend some time with what Christian Bloch, Author of the HDRI handbook described on his website (http://www.hdrlabs.com/news/index.php?id=8523427427292113719) as "SNS-HDR Pro. It rocks!":
Quote from: Christian Bloch
I'm just coming from a review marathon of 20 HDR programs for the upcoming book revision. Turned out that one application really stood out from the crowd. I figured it would be mean to not share this with you right away, because you can most certainly use it for some great photography in the meantime.

That comes from a real authority in the HDRI world, not just someone with an opinion.

Cheers,
Bart

P.S. The current drawback of SNS-HDR Pro is that it's a Windows program only, but it's so much better than the rest that people will use Parallels to be able and run it on a Mac.
Title: Re: Photomatix - is it the best one ?
Post by: Bart_van_der_Wolf on October 19, 2013, 02:02:47 pm
SNS-HDR has disappointed me by introducing a purple cast in the sky. It may be possible to tweak this, but ImageFuser (Mac) gives me unchanged colors right out of the box, see image at at left. Donation ware.

Hi Hening,

May depend on the source images. I never get such issues, but I work with TIFF input, not Raw. It also allows to preserve the TIFF color profile one prefers to work in.

The benefit of using TIFFs as input files is that you can apply your personal Capture sharpening and Chromatic Aberration corrections (and even noise reduction on the lowest exposure bracket frames only). That also allows to use a different White balance for the longer Shadow exposures than for the shorter highlight exposures (e.g. daylight WB for outside the window shots, and more tungsten WB for the interiors, in case of an architectural interior setting).

And that is just for the input brackets, even before working with the program's tonemapping controls which offer huge flexibility, and Real-time screen updates, which is a revelation for creative work.

Cheers,
Bart
Title: Re: Photomatix - is it the best one ?
Post by: Hening Bettermann on October 19, 2013, 02:19:48 pm
Hi Bart,

the input was TIFs! -

Do you use different white balances globally, by exposure, rather than by area (sunlit-shadow)? - Well, that's another topic.

Kind regards - Hening.

Title: Re: Photomatix - is it the best one ?
Post by: Bart_van_der_Wolf on October 19, 2013, 02:26:16 pm
Hi Bart,

the input was TIFs! -

Strange that it would produce such magenta shifted blues then.

Quote
Do you use different white balances globally, by exposure, rather than by area (sunlit-shadow)? - Well, that's another topic.

Yes, discussing that in detail would be a bit too much off-topic for this thread, but in short, it depends on the scene. Could make an interesting thread of its own though, the benefits of using TIFFs as input for exposure fusion ...

Cheers,
Bart
Title: Re: Photomatix - is it the best one ?
Post by: cortlander on October 20, 2013, 09:32:16 am
I have used Photomatix, Photoshop's HDR and NIK's HDR Efex Pro-2. My strong preference is for HDR Efex Pro-2.
Title: Re: Photomatix - is it the best one ?
Post by: Kirk Gittings on October 20, 2013, 03:15:55 pm
Hi Alan,

I prefer SNS-HDR Pro (http://www.sns-hdr.com/) for natural looking HDRI tonemapping. Tonemapping of HDRIs has improved a lot in Photoshop CS6 with the introduction of Process version 2012, which can handle floating point TIFF composites, but it is still not as good as SNS-HDR Pro (a new version (2.0) is expected this month or soon after that, according to it's author).

I find that Photomatix has improved a lot over the years, but it is still too easy to produce completely over-the-top abominations. I prefer realistic renderings, which can then still be tweaked into a more abstract version if needed.

There are other contenders as well, but none of them performed as well a SNS-HDR Pro in my experience. Oloneo PhotoEngine appears to have had a very close look at SNS-HDR when they made that application, but it produced halo artifacts at high contrast window edges, last time I looked at it. It's also more expensive than SNS-HDR Pro. The HDR Expose program from Unified Colors looks promising for realistic looking work, but the versions I have tried had substandard HDR compositing functionality and were very slow in their rendering, compared to the real-time screen updates of SNS-HDR.

Cheers,
Bart


DITTO
Title: Re: Photomatix - is it the best one ?
Post by: Paul2660 on October 20, 2013, 07:38:58 pm
I have worked with Photomatrix, SNS-HDR, Photoshop CS5 Straight Tone mapping with actions, Nik HDR efex 1 & 2, and Oloeno. 

Currently if I find I need to use a HDR software I will lead with Nik HDR efex 2.  I also prefer to work with Tiff output as Bart mentioned since I can have much better control over the CA and sharpening.  This is very easy to do in LR with the Nik Plugin.  I have not tried the software Kevin mentions, but have looked at it in the past and will try it again.   Nik for me seems to have a very good grasp in most cases of ghosting/movement of subject matter (example branches moving due to wind), very good handle on noise (blending of images without noise creation), and an excellent alignment algorithm that works very well.  Sadly since Nik was sold to Google, there has not been any more innovations to this software and probably won't be.  Nik via LR runs very quickly, saves the file to the catalog and then allows you to do more work on the file in LR before you export the image.

Photomatrix I have tried on and off over the years, and occasionally I like what I get from the tone mapping solution the HDR output tends to show the 3D grunge look too quickly for me.  I also don't prefer the design of their interface, it's overdue for a newer look. 

SNS-HDR I worked with (Pro) version over 1 year ago, and just did not seem to see output I like, or workflow.  As I recall it was not a plug-in and was stand alone, (but I may have that wrong). 

Oloeno was a tool I used heavily until Nik updated their software to vr 2.  Again, stand alone and for a long time was not aware of color managed monitors, but that was fixed finally.  By color management I refer to a NEC spectraview software generated monitor profile.

Since I started shooting the Nikon D800, I find I rarely need HDR processing any more as the range of a singe raw file at lower iso has so much room.  I am also finding this to be true with the Fuji X-E1.  I mainly looked at HDR software to assist in exposure blending not the grunge look, over processed look. 

The nice thing about most of these tools is that they offer a good trial program so you can test several at once.

Paul Caldwell
Title: Re: Photomatix - is it the best one ?
Post by: Alan Matuka on October 21, 2013, 07:54:01 am
Thank you all for your answers :-)
Since I work on Mac only it seems that I will have to choose between Nik HDR efex pro and Photomatix. I have to say that I am not very keen on over-the-top effects, and would use HDR software to extend tonal range in the shot ( i.e. zone system ) and perhaps to give it a bit of surreal effect - ' a bit ' being a key part of the expression.

As you said, best thing would be to do parallel test with Photomatix and Nik HDR, and see the results.
Thank you once again, I will let you know what works best for me.
Title: Re: Photomatix - is it the best one ?
Post by: francois on October 21, 2013, 08:24:47 am
Thank you all for your answers :-)
Since I work on Mac only it seems that I will have to choose between Nik HDR efex pro and Photomatix.


HDR Expose 3 (http://www.unifiedcolor.com/products/hdr-expose-3) is also supposed to be working on a Mac. I haven't found the time to test it and I look forward to Kevin's review.
Title: Re: Photomatix - is it the best one ?
Post by: Alan Matuka on October 21, 2013, 08:48:01 am
HDR Expose 3 (http://www.unifiedcolor.com/products/hdr-expose-3) is also supposed to be working on a Mac. I haven't found the time to test it and I look forward to Kevin's review.


Me too  :)
Title: Re: Photomatix - is it the best one ?
Post by: Bart_van_der_Wolf on October 21, 2013, 10:52:21 am
HDR Expose 3 (http://www.unifiedcolor.com/products/hdr-expose-3) is also supposed to be working on a Mac. I haven't found the time to test it and I look forward to Kevin's review.

Hi Francois,

HDR Expose has become much better since the introduction of version 3 earlier this year, and it  can produce pretty good quality output. It's tonemapping is not as flexible and adjustable as with SNS-HDR, but the image quality comes close.

Photomatix is currently preparing a beta version 5, which also offers some improved exposure fusion and more realistic tonemapping, but I would not rate its image quality as high as the other two.

Cheers,
Bart
Title: Re: Photomatix - is it the best one ?
Post by: francois on October 21, 2013, 11:32:47 am
Hi Francois,

HDR Expose has become much better since the introduction of version 3 earlier this year, and it  can produce pretty good quality output. It's tonemapping is not as flexible and adjustable as with SNS-HDR, but the image quality comes close.

Photomatix is currently preparing a beta version 5, which also offers some improved exposure fusion and more realistic tonemapping, but I would not rate its image quality as high as the other two.

Cheers,
Bart

Hi Bart,
Thanks for the info. I'll download the trial version of HDR Expose and give it a try. I'm not fond of the HDR look and much prefer natural looking images.
Title: Re: Photomatix - is it the best one ?
Post by: kirkt on October 21, 2013, 12:12:15 pm
One thing to consider that is often overlooked (or at least not explicitly mentioned) in the discussion of the HDR workflow is whether or not you intend to actually need or want to work in full 32bit for post-production prior to rendering an LDR image.  

Oloneo and SNS do not output 32bit files (hopefully I am recalling this correctly - it's been a while since I trialed these applications), so your "HDR" workflow ends in those applications.  In contrast, Photomatix, Expose and PS merge and output 32bit files (in various HDR formats - Expose has always provided their own format (.BEF) in addition to TIFF, HDR and EXR).  Photomatix's batch merge utility is hands down the most flexible and robust.  I have used all of these applications and find that certain ones are more appropriate for a particular task than others.  I use Macs, but ran Oloneo and SNS in WindowsXP (via Parallels) and they worked fine, if you care to go that route.  I find that the Nik tonemapping is way too aggressive and halo prone, and the color shifts are difficult to control - their merge utility is weak.   photoshop's merge to hdr pro, as well as photomatix and expose's merge utilities all have their strengths and weaknesses in their control of ghosting and alignment - try the free trials to see which suits your approach best.

I would suggest Photomatix or Expose3 (in addition to of PS), with the idea that, as with most HDR workflows, you are not trying to produce a "final" image from these applications, but you are trying to get a good tonal range compression with control over white balance, local contrast and saturation with the intention of exporting a 16bit TIFF for further processing in Photoshop, etc.  Recall also that Expose has a Photoshop plug-in version called Float32, if that is more convenient access to their tonemapping than working outside of Photoshop to perform your tone mapping.

FDR Tools is another application that has very powerful HDR tools, but is a bit quirky to use.

It all depends on what you plan to do with the data once you have acquired it.  

Also - Photomatix is in the process of beta release for version 5 - you can download it and test it yourself!
http://www.hdrsoft.com/download/betas/pmp50.php

Here is a list of HDR applications (somewhat current):
http://www.hdrlabs.com/tools/links.html

have fun!

kirk
Title: Re: Photomatix - is it the best one ?
Post by: Alan Smallbone on October 21, 2013, 12:13:29 pm
Having tried most of them over the years,  I like SNS-HDR pro and Photomatix. Overall I think SNS does a much better job making natural looking images. I found HDR-Efex to be a lot more difficult to get reasonable images and like Bart mentioned I had bigger problems with halos.

Most if not all of them offer trial versions.

Alan
Title: Re: Photomatix - is it the best one ?
Post by: LKaven on October 23, 2013, 09:17:19 pm
The new edition of the HDRI Handbook (2nd Ed) has excellent, comprehensive comparisons that illustrate the differences among several different packages.  Christian Bloch did a great job on this book, and it's well worth getting. 
Title: Re: Photomatix - is it the best one ?
Post by: nma on October 23, 2013, 10:31:47 pm
The new edition of the HDRI Handbook (2nd Ed) has excellent, comprehensive comparisons that illustrate the differences among several different packages.  Christian Bloch did a great job on this book, and it's well worth getting. 

Highly recommended for the techniques. The software details and programs are often out of date, due to the speed of HDR developments.
This is a must read for the serious photographer, not just for HDR junkies.
Title: Re: Photomatix - is it the best one ?
Post by: Alan Klein on November 11, 2013, 12:33:15 am
I'm only interested in using two or three pictures exposed at different stops and then blending to take the place of a gradient ND filter.  Which would you recommend?
Title: Re: Photomatix - is it the best one ?
Post by: cortlander on November 11, 2013, 07:00:51 am
The new edition of the HDRI Handbook (2nd Ed) has excellent, comprehensive comparisons that illustrate the differences among several different packages.  Christian Bloch did a great job on this book, and it's well worth getting. 

An excellent book!
Title: Re: Photomatix - is it the best one ?
Post by: Bart_van_der_Wolf on November 11, 2013, 11:53:55 am
I'm only interested in using two or three pictures exposed at different stops and then blending to take the place of a gradient ND filter.  Which would you recommend?

Hi Alan,

SNS-HDR is still the one to be beaten by other offerings, i.e. if you want to get a natural looking image without halo artifacts and lots of possible adjustments (if needed).

Lightroom/ACR can come close if used on 32-bit TIFFs, but not without some remaining issues. Photomatix can produce acceptable output, its exposure fusion produses somewhat more natural looking images. HDR Expose 3 does a nice jub, but it produces halos e.g. most noticeable at the top of white clouds and it cannot handle Chromatic Aberration.

Cheers,
Bart
Title: Re: Photomatix - is it the best one ?
Post by: cocasana on November 12, 2013, 06:26:14 am
Nobody even considering 32 bit Photoshop's HDR?
Title: Re: Photomatix - is it the best one ?
Post by: IcelandAurora on November 19, 2013, 05:46:40 am
My preference for a stand alone tonemapping program is Photomatix, but why not try a different direction and experiment with some luminosity masks?  This is a method for controlling local contrast, developed by Tony Kuyper.  Definitely worth checking out.
Title: Re: Photomatix - is it the best one ?
Post by: cortlander on November 23, 2013, 10:41:20 am
I have used Photomatix, Photoshop's HDR and NIK's HDR Efex Pro-2. My strong preference is for HDR Efex Pro-2.

Photomatix released a new version - 5. The upgrade is free for those who purchased in the last couple of years. So I upgraded my old Photomatix 4 and have to say was very pleased with the results. So now it is back from HDR Efex Pro-2 to Photomatix 5, for me. I use Mac OS X 10.9
Title: Re: Photomatix - is it the best one ?
Post by: Chacaboy on December 01, 2013, 01:04:42 am
Hi Francois,

If you prefer natural looking images without all the tone mapping, before you make your decision it would be a good idea to try the Enfuse plug-in for Lightroom. Some people (myself included, and I have Photomatix) who try this never need anything else, ever.

let us know if it works for you,

Lane
Title: Re: Photomatix - is it the best one ?
Post by: ErikKaffehr on December 01, 2013, 01:53:23 am
Hi,

I seldom use need/use HDR, what I found works for me is using Photoshop "Merge to HDR" to create a HDR image but do all tone mapping in Lightroom.

Best regards
Erik


One thing to consider that is often overlooked (or at least not explicitly mentioned) in the discussion of the HDR workflow is whether or not you intend to actually need or want to work in full 32bit for post-production prior to rendering an LDR image.  

Oloneo and SNS do not output 32bit files (hopefully I am recalling this correctly - it's been a while since I trialed these applications), so your "HDR" workflow ends in those applications.  In contrast, Photomatix, Expose and PS merge and output 32bit files (in various HDR formats - Expose has always provided their own format (.BEF) in addition to TIFF, HDR and EXR).  Photomatix's batch merge utility is hands down the most flexible and robust.  I have used all of these applications and find that certain ones are more appropriate for a particular task than others.  I use Macs, but ran Oloneo and SNS in WindowsXP (via Parallels) and they worked fine, if you care to go that route.  I find that the Nik tonemapping is way too aggressive and halo prone, and the color shifts are difficult to control - their merge utility is weak.   photoshop's merge to hdr pro, as well as photomatix and expose's merge utilities all have their strengths and weaknesses in their control of ghosting and alignment - try the free trials to see which suits your approach best.

I would suggest Photomatix or Expose3 (in addition to of PS), with the idea that, as with most HDR workflows, you are not trying to produce a "final" image from these applications, but you are trying to get a good tonal range compression with control over white balance, local contrast and saturation with the intention of exporting a 16bit TIFF for further processing in Photoshop, etc.  Recall also that Expose has a Photoshop plug-in version called Float32, if that is more convenient access to their tonemapping than working outside of Photoshop to perform your tone mapping.

FDR Tools is another application that has very powerful HDR tools, but is a bit quirky to use.

It all depends on what you plan to do with the data once you have acquired it.  

Also - Photomatix is in the process of beta release for version 5 - you can download it and test it yourself!
http://www.hdrsoft.com/download/betas/pmp50.php

Here is a list of HDR applications (somewhat current):
http://www.hdrlabs.com/tools/links.html

have fun!

kirk
Title: Re: Photomatix - is it the best one ?
Post by: jrsforums on December 01, 2013, 09:46:04 am
Hi,

I seldom use need/use HDR, what I found works for me is using Photoshop "Merge to HDR" to create a HDR image but do all tone mapping in Lightroom.

Best regards
Erik



...and, if you do not have Photoshop, the Photomatix "Merge to 32 bit" produces similar results...
Title: Re: Photomatix - is it the best one ?
Post by: francois on December 01, 2013, 12:41:07 pm
Hi Francois,

If you prefer natural looking images without all the tone mapping, before you make your decision it would be a good idea to try the Enfuse plug-in for Lightroom. Some people (myself included, and I have Photomatix) who try this never need anything else, ever.

let us know if it works for you,

Lane

Thanks,
I'm already using Enfuse with Lightroom. I'd say that in general and I agree with you, Enfuse gives more natural results. Sometimes, other programs are simply better. It all depends on the subject. I'm trying the Lumariver HDR application and also got good results but I'd need  a lot more time with this software to really understand who it works and compare with other apps.