Why Bother With Photomatix or LR/Enfuse For Real Estate Interior Photos? I shot six brackets of my living room that has a huge bright window and processed the brackets with LR/Enfuse and/or Photomatix and compared the results to what I get by just adjusting one of the RAW bracket files with Lightroom 5. Photography For Real. Lr Enfuse Plugin Serial Numbers. Convert Lr Enfuse Plugin trail version to full software.
Are developed and released by me, an American living in Kyoto, Japan. That's me, in the yellow shirt holding the dish of bubble stuff. My plugins for Adobe Lightroom are “donationware”. I develop, release, and maintain them for free, and you can use them for free forever, but I hope you find them worthy of a gift of thanks or encouragement.
They are fully functional for a long initial trial period, after which functionality is reduced until they are registered. You don't need to register, but if you want to, it generally costs one cent ( a PayPal fee). If you'd care to read about why I have chosen this path, see my blog posts “ ”, “” and “”. After the initial trial period ends, I don't want to shut them down completely and leave someone in the lurch, but I do want to encourage registration (and potential gifts), so they become somewhat restricted until registered, usually to processing no more than 10 images at a time.
If you don't mind the restriction, there's no need to register. How it Works In short: make a payment of any amount to me via PayPal, and the resulting PayPal transaction ID is your plugin registration code, good until your Lightroom serial number changes. If you choose to make a payment of $0.01 (or whatever minimum PayPal allows for your currency), PayPal takes that as a fee and I receive nothing, and that's perfectly fine. If you choose to make a larger payment, anything left after PayPal takes its fees remains as a gift to me for which I (and more importantly, my wife) am most appreciative. You do not need a PayPal account: if you don't have one, you can pay through PayPal using a credit card.
To generate a registration code, follow the button below to make a payment through PayPal. Note — I've gotten scattered reports that PayPal inexplicably forces a minimum of $1.00 for some folks, when starting a transaction with the button below. If you're caught up in this, you can get around that forced minimum by going to directly, click on 'send', and setting the recipient to “ [email protected]” manually.
Sorry for the hassles. Worldwide except Japan. The only requirement to register is the minimum PayPal fee, which I do not receive. Whether to include any gift for me is completely optional and up to you. You can use the button to the left, or manually generate a transaction with the recipient set to “ jfriedl @yahoo.com”.
(This manual method must be used if PayPal in your country does not allow the sending of gifts.) How To Use Your Registration Code After you generate a transaction at PayPal, you can find the “Unique Transaction ID” (or, for some users, the “Receipt Number”) immediately on the confirmation page, the confirmation email, or your PayPal history screen. That'll bring up a dialog in which you can paste your registration code. (It is case sensitive, so it's best to copy-and-paste so that there are no typos.) The Fine Print I'm trying to be really laid back and reasonable. No one wants to give a gift to a jerk. But I've got to set some limits, so here they are.
I've developed plugins for years , pushing out, and it is my intention to continue to push out new features and bug fixes from time to time. But I must be clear that while it's my intention, it is not a guarantee. I am not a business and I don't want to be a business — this is just a hobby, after all — and you are not purchasing anything when you register the plugin. Officially, there are no guarantees other than the registration code will work to remove the trial-period-ended limitation of the copy of the plugin you have, for the version of Lightroom you have.
Your registration ties one plugin to one Lightroom serial number, and you can use the same registration code (PayPal transaction ID) to register that plugin with that same Lightroom serial number on multiple machines, such as if you use Lightroom on the two machines Adobe's license allows, or you later have to do a full system reinstall. If you don't have a PayPal account and don't have a credit card, you won't be able to register plugins in the normal way. Send me a note and I'll take care of you.
I will request (but not require) that you send me some good karma by doing something nice for someone locally. Similarly, if you administer Lightroom on a bunch of computers (e.g. At a school or large business) and you don't have a single bulk-install serial number from Adobe, send me a note and I'll get you a less restricted registration code so that you don't have to hassle with PayPal a zillion times. Due to the nature of the system I've built, you cannot register a plugin during Lightroom's “free trial” phase, because it doesn't yet have a serial number.
Also, I do not permit the use of my plugins on pirated copies of Lightroom. Major Lightroom Upgrades, or Moving to the Creative Cloud Registrations are tied to the Lightroom serial number. Because the Lightroom serial number changes at a major upgrade (e.g. Lr5.x to Lr6.x), or if you move from standalone Lightroom to the Creative-Cloud Lightroom or back, plugins become deregistered. As always, you can generate a new registration code (for one cent — 1/100 th of a dollar — if you wish). Sorry for the hassles.
Dot releases (e.g. Lr6.0 → Lr6.1) do not affect registrations.
If You Need to Re-Register but Have Forgotten Your Registration Code, or It Doesn't Seem To Work. If you need to reregister and have forgotten your code, it might be easiest/fastest just to create a new code with a 1-cent transaction. On non-CC versions of Lightroom, the plugin includes a “Forgot Your Code?” button on the plugin-registration dialog, which can retrieve the your code if you had previously entered it for that plugin on that install of Lightroom. You can also always check your PayPal history screen. If a registration code is rejected as “used on another install ”, it's because your Lightroom serial number has changed (because, for example, you performed a major upgrade, such as from Lr5 to Lr6, or you switch to or from the Creative Cloud).
Sorry for the hassles, but please just generate a new code (with a $0.01 amount if you like). Sharing with the ExifTool Author My is built around Phil Harvey's most-excellent library, so I share half of any gifts I receive related to this plugin with Phil. Officially, all my hobby stuff (publishing, photography, and software) are conducted through my company, DialRight Software Inc. Hello from a longtime user of your Lightroom-to-Smugmug plug-in in Omaha, Nebraska, USA! I’ve been holding out against switching to the “new Smugmug” because my Smugmug workflow revolves around your plug-in and I’m really happy with it. The last few times I’ve checked, your version history said your plug-in isn’t compatible with the “new Smugmug” (because they never got around to issuing an API, if I remember correctly) and I’m fine with that. Now, though, I’m getting emails from Smugmug saying “Your version of Smugmug will be retired,” making it sound as if they’re going to force me to switch in the fairly near future.
Do you think your plug-in will be able to migrate to the “new Smugmug” at all? If not, should I be barking at Smugmug about this? I know they’ve got a collection-based approach to publishing from Lightroom, but it’s really lame compared to using your plug-in.
Thanks for any info Their new API is still in closed beta, so I’ve no plans to move any time soon. I don’t know the relationship (if any) between the old/new API and the old/new user experience, so I’ve sent them a note asking. I do know that many “new SmugMug” users use my plugins, so it’s not wholly incompatible. —Jeffrey Heard back from SmugMug the “new SmugMug” mostly works with the old API, but there are some areas not covered.
They feel they’re getting closer to releasing the new API from beta, so I’ll probably be updating the plugin for it sometime later this year. Hello – sorry about my English I am French Sorry to use this way but I don’t find another mean to contact you about an issue I have with the plugin.
I used your plugin from several years ago but with the latest version of LR and when I installed the plugin I cannot perform the Authorize process. When I click on Authorize from Smugmug Account it informs me about the fact that a browser will be launched for authentication but nothing occurs. Have you an advise to fix it? Best Regards Michel I’d guess that a reinstall of Lightroom would fix it. How about the registration with Picasa and Google Photos. If I bought your plugin now, should I be obliged to pay new fee when the Photos version of plugin will appear? My plugins are free; no one has “bought” them, and no ones is obliged to pay anything for them.
The 1-cent fee to PayPal for registration is optional. I intend to build a plugin for Google Photos if Google comes up with a public API for it. It will be a separate plugin unless the API is just a copy of the PicasaWeb API. Part of me hopes it is, because then I don’t have to do much work, but the PicasaWeb API is atrocious to work with, so for my future sanity I hope they discard it. Hey, I just upgraded from LR5.7 to LR6 and am trying to submit a $1 donation to generate a new registration code for my already-registered PicasaWeb plugin. However when I try to make the donation through Paypal it says “Your request failed due to technical difficulties.Please try again after some time.” I’ve tried both Chrome and Safari so I don’t think it’s an issue on my end.
Is your Paypal account still active? I’ve gotten a few reports of this lately the best I can tell is that it’s a technical issue at PayPal’s site. Nothing about the process at PayPal actually interacts with my stuff it’s not until one enters a registration code into the plugin that it ever touches stuff related specifically to me. I wish I could suggest something more beyond “try again later” but PayPal is completely opaque to me. )-: —Jeffrey. I’m also seeing a requirement to pay a dollar rather than one cent. As I have 10 plugins this means a minimum of $10.
I don’t mind the $10 (the plugins are worth it – and I might actually donate more). But if I donate $10 then it appears Paypal takes the lot and Jeffrey gets nothing, which hardly seems fair. Even if I donate $30 paypal still takes at least 1/3 of the donation.
Is there any way to make a single donation to cover multiple plugins? Yes, just use the transaction code to register one plugin, then send it to me along with your needs and I’ll take care of it. I wonder whether the $1 minimum is related to your country or base currency?? I never heard about a minimum until this week.
I encountered the problem with Paypal of minimum $1 payment, and while that does not bother me, I cannot enter any amount where it says $0.00. It simply isn’t possible to enter number here! I also tried credit card, and get an error message when I try to pay via that route. I’m stymied now and because I can’t use the plugin will have to upload a large number of files to zenfolio manually. Hope this can be resolved soon. I’ve added a “TEST BUTTON” to the page could you give it a try? If that doesn’t work, could you just ignore the button and go directly to PayPal and try creating a transaction from scratch, with as the destination?
I started getting an error message after working with the plugin since 2013 can you please tell me how to resolve it. Thanks (System returned “securityError” when Lightroom attempted to use the Internet: Are you sure that your system date and time are correct?) A smattering of users are getting this.
If you’re among them, and doesn’t help, please report the exact version of your OS, your browser, and of Lightroom. I don’t know what the problem is, but I think it’s somehow related to SLL security certificates. On updateing to LR 7 all my publishing services plugins are gone. I’ve tried going through my paypal reciepts to check out the registration codes ive found from you and none of them worked.
When i click on the Register now button it funnels me to your description of how to register, but does not let me register again. Any suggestions on how I can fix this? I’m not sure exactly what you’re reporting, but upgrading Lightroom should not cause any harm to your publish services. Are you sure you had Lightroom upgrade the correct catalog? If so, perhaps try the upgrade again publish services should not be harmed in any way during an upgrade. As for the unrelated topic of my plugins and registrations, as it’s been for a decade, but new registration codes are essentially free (1 cent).
Sorry for the hassle. What a great plugin.
I used to geotag my photo from a file en Lightroom does it rather properly with however a drawback: City, province, country are discovered but remains in grey in the IPTC field. Using reversegeo on the photos having already the GPS info works great. Is is so convenient that I can get the info in my own language! Do not use google map, the city info for Indonesia is only the kabuten not the actual city. Openmap gives the proper result. I have not yet used all the features, with reversegeo only, you already deserve a donation! I really don’t like this reset of registration for LR.
I had a problem with the configuration file of LR and when I started it again the plugins reported the “already in use for a different Lightroom serial number” for the same version! I don’t have this problem with plugins from other authors. I’d imagine that you have LrCC, but internally it upgraded from Lr6 to Lr7. Sorry about the hassles you can make a new code with a 1-cent transaction, if you like. Lightroom doesn’t have any internal support for this kind of stuff, so each plugin author has to figure out their own system, and for better or worse, this is what I came up with a decade ago. Thanks for the response.
But I wrote: I donated with my CC. No Paypal involved. I only have a note on my bank account regarding this transaction. “You do not need a PayPal account: if you don’t have one, you can pay through PayPal using a credit card.” So, on the linked PayPal page, I chose “Donate with a Debit or Credit Card” After the donation, I haven’t got any “Unique Transaction ID” I hope I didn’t miss it, but I’m sure there wasn’t any. Any suggestions? PayPal would have presented a “transaction ID” or a “Receipt Number”.
Unfortunately, I don’t have access to these until you use them in a plugin. Reach out to me via email ([email protected]) and I’ll get you a code you can use. Jeffry, Recently migrated from LR 6 to LR 7.3 and when attempting to update my copy of the Export To Facebook plugin, I get an error message “The plugin does not seem to be installed in a location where Lightroom can write to it. If you can’t adjust permissions to allow the plugin to update itself, you’ll have to do a manual upgrade.” Could you send me a link with instructions for doing the manual upgrade? In this case, a manual upgrade is just to delete the old copy, and do an as you did the first time.
I just paid Paypal again for the plugin, & got a transaction code (15 digits), but when I enter it in the registration field in Lightroom, it’s not enough numbers, or whatever, because the registration button is still greyed out. I really need this plugin, I use it for work, and I’m on a deadline. Any ideas/suggestions? PayPal has this infuriating bug whereby they don’t display the leading zeros of a transaction code that has them. Modern versions of my plugin should handle them, but in any case, you can reformat it yourself by adding as many leading zeros are required to make 16 digits, then move the ‘-‘ around so that the digits are in groups of four. Hello jeffrey bob in ojai ca here.all of a sudden nothing is workingim using a mac and LR 5 and untill yesterday was happy as a clamsuddenly the sky went dark metaphorically im getting a message saying unexpected HTML. Reply from smugmug?????
I thought oh it looks like theres an updated plugin maybe thats the problem i clicked on update plug in i thought oh i prolly need to logg out and logg back inthat was a disaster complete.now i cant do anything.cant log in cant upload i have the code and wonder if my password is valid,as smugmug had me change password about 6-8 months agoive tried using the new password thats a big negativeim really tired and cant believe this glitch ive stumbled intoeverything was workin just great until sunday! Please if you have the time i would love to return to pre sunday times any help will be appreciatedi just cant believe this mess.ps smugmug says everythings fine on their end! Anyways thanks for reading this,i just feel defeatedyur pal bob Please see.
Leave a comment. Name Mail (optional; will not be published) Notify me of followup comments, or when Jeffrey replies, via email. Fill in your email and check this box if you expect a reply from Jeffrey and don't want to keep checking the comments manually. Website (if you have one) Enter “ Happy” (without quotes) in this box ( required — this helps stop spambots) All comments are invisible to others until Jeffrey approves them. Please mention what part of the world you're writing from, if you don't mind. It's always interesting to see where people are visiting from.
You can use basic HTML; be sure to close tags properly.
Let me start by confessing that I shoot brackets very seldom because I like and I don’t like some of the side effects of bracket processing like the soft look, color shifts and being forced to deal with only existing light. I know from doing polls that some where around 45% of PFRE readers use a bracketing workflow for their real estate photography. The theory behind using Photomatix and similar bracket processing software has always been that you use Exposure Fusion, HDR or a hybrid of bracketing and flash to bring the brightness of the windows and the darker interior closer together. But thanks to an in response to Scott Hargis’s comments in the PFRE photographer of the month pool the last few months I’ve become convinced that, like Scott says, you can get to just as good or better an image if you start with a single RAW file and adjust it in Lightroom 4 or later (equivalent to ACR version 7.o or later which PSE 11 and PS CS6 use). After reading/seeing I reproduced his experiment myself to verify it. That is, I shot six brackets of my living room that has a huge bright window and processed the brackets with LR/Enfuse and/or Photomatix and compared the results to what I get by just adjusting one of the RAW bracket files with Lightroom 5.
I always like the Lightroom 5 result best. This is equivalent to what Tony did because the Adobe Camera RAW engine that is in Lightroom is also used by PSE 11 which Tony used. So why are so many real estate shooters using Photomatix and similar bracketing programs if you can get to the same place with one RAW file? Probably because not everyone is aware the huge improvement that Adobe made to the Adobe Camera RAW processing engine in LR4 and ACR 7.x that came out in the spring of 2012. It was literally a game changer.
Nowadays, with the Highlights/Shadows sliders and the other sliders in the LR Basic panel you can do everything those bracket processing programs can do and get an image without all the side effects inherent in Exposure Fusion or HDR process. Plus, it’s faster both shooting and processing. To be clear, I’m not talking anything about flash here at all. I’m just talking about getting a realistic capture of available light. Of course flash will take your images to a whole new level once you get the hang of it.
I’m just saying if you are not ready to use flash for whatever reason, it doesn’t mean your only other option is shooting brackets and using Photomatix or other bracket processing software. Try it and see for yourself.
To me this is a huge and important revelation! You can spend a lot of time shooting and processing brackets and even more time trying to control the side effects of shooting and processing brackets. Why bother if it’s more effective to just shoot one RAW file.
One more thing, I used the same RAW file in my experiment above in Aperture 3.4.5 and I could not get a final image that looks quite as good as the result I can get with Lightroom 5. I’m not saying it can’t be done. I just can’t seem to do it. I think the Photomatix Pro Exposure fusion result looks better than the Aperture only result.
I agree Larry. LR5 is an amazing piece of software and I’m thrilled to see what can be done with one RAW photo and some LR5 adjustments! However, I’m still trying to work through Scott’s lighting books and videos and I understand the techniques he teaches there. I really want to use exclusively flash for lighting interiors because I believe it gives a better overall quality to the photo and more accurate colors. However I still struggle with lighting the larger living spaces with differing light sources and large windows overlooking the Gulf of Mexico and other vistas which the agents believes is what sells the property. There I do a 3-shot HDR with manual blending in Photoshop for the outside window view.
I wonder how the new Photomatix version 5 will work with these types of shots?. larry September 22nd, 2013 at 8:46 pm.
I appreciate your comparison and wish I could duplicate it in my own work. Cranking down the highlights and boosting the shadows in LR5 doesn’t yield a result that satisfies me.
There is simply more dynamic range in the scene than my Canon 5D Mk. III can capture. Windows and reflections on wood floors and tables just don’t render naturally to my eye. Attempting to manually mask these hot spots in PS layers often leaves dark stains on window sills and around the edges of splashes of light on interior surfaces. No matter how I struggle.
Clearly Scott’s flash techniques are the best answer, and I use them more now. But I still find some of the better HDR programs do a good job as a start before the usual finishing work. Yes, HDR programs even used well do produce an oddly flat and dull looking intermediate result. But finished in LR with Clarity and Contrast, I believe most photographers can achieve a result that looks better than any single-exposure process. I have started using SNS-HDR Pro to good effect. But no matter which HDR program you use I recommend first applying color correction to the bracketed set in LR to neutralize any color cast.
Photomatix is particularly guilty of exaggerating color casts that produce garish images that are hard to eliminate later. larry September 23rd, 2013 at 12:31 pm. @Wick – Do not feel bad about your camera not being able to span the entire dynamic range. Tony’s could not either; he remembered ‘blending in’ the windows with a -1 EV image later on. @Larry, I will be interested in learning more as well. In a single image capture, if the dynamic range of the camera is exceeded, it is exceeded. That is the crux of the issue HDR/ExpFusion is intended to overcomeand presumably why Tony still needed to use a second exposure to achieve an acceptable result.
larry September 23rd, 2013 at 2:18 pm. Larry you are 100% right. I have been doing this for years. Each time I would try HDR I liked the LR with single exposure better or considered it equal. I underexpose.75 ev and that normally allow the windows to be captured without being blown out. I now never use flash, don’t even bring it in with me. Though I’m sure I’ll develop a technique using just a touch of flash.
I let myself get talked into trying Oloneo for comparison. The funny thing is I would still shoot a single RAW and expose it the same as I had before. After running it through the presets I set up for the way I shoot, the end result was very close to the same as using LR. The advantage to Oloneo was that it treated that single image in a way to squeeze out a better image without have bad color shifts. In LR I could do the same thing but the batch processing in Oloneo let me set and forget it and come back when it was done.
Now the resulting images were close to LR results but with more noise and much larger files and no straightening the images out. So now I use the Oloneo HDR program with a single image and take the output and feed that through LR where I can straighten/Crop and resize and clean up the noise very fast. On occasion I have to make a slight adjustment but the two step process is faster that doing it all in LR.
In other words Oloneo seams to make all the right equivalent LR slider moves and I just have to touch up in LR. I see no reason for me to use layers of exposures with the results I already get. I can hand hold the camera, never use a tripod and I’m in and out of a room in 60 seconds. Thanks for confirming what I already knew. While I will experiment with layers I’m always looking to cut time and work out not add time for minimal quality improvement. September 23rd, 2013 at 5:13 pm. I was surprised to see this article posted yesterday.
I’ve been shooting real estate for a couple of years now and I would say 99.9% of my work is done in available light with single exposure RAW shots pulled through Lightroom. I have fiddled with manual and automated HDR, flashes, and enfuse but at no point have I been tempted to permanently step away from my tried and trusted.
• Revit Architecture, Revit Structure, or Revit MEP: Each one is their own install and do not have all the fucntionalities of the missing installs (eg: Revit Structure does not have MEP Connectors. Here's how it goes: • Revit OneBox: One installation of Revit, with all three disciplines as Ribbon Tabs. Revit MEP does not have Structural tools and settings, etc). Revit OneBox is not like Building Design Suite, it simply wraps all the three different versions of Revit into one interface.
The results are consistently satisfying and the technique allows me to work a property quickly, dynamically, and unobtrusively. Of course, there are compromises.
With all our fancy technology, there is little to be done for a single exposure in a dim room against a Texas summer afternoon. Dramatic adjustments will take a toll on image quality and color accuracy. The thing is – much of my real estate photography is shot with the sole intention of marketing the property rather than creating museum quality archival prints. I find the market often leans towards NASCAR flash rather than F1 finesse. Not that there is anything wrong with NASCAR, nor do I know much about either sport, but I hope you’re hip to my jive.
I don’t mean to imply that the quality of my images suffers for my choice of technique. On the contrary, I hold my deliverables to a high standard. Every client, every situation, every property is different.
Shoot the methods with which you are most comfortable and adjust as necessary to get the photos your client is looking for. And don’t forget to live a little. Matt September 23rd, 2013 at 8:42 pm. Response for Cal on a T2 Bare bulb: Yes.
You can cut a lot of process if you learn to use a flash meter and manage the shutter speed in many situations. Many photographers of other years know bare bulb is a positive use of style. HDR is a great concept and many time “over processed”. But it will always be a photographer that looks at a room situation and leverages the tools in the toolbox (hot lights, strobes, reflectors, diffusers, so forth) that creates a style.
And as a side note – continue to learn about what color balance represents and filtration. Enjoy always so much to learn about imaging.
It is always about light, without it you have no imagelol. Wick Smith September 24th, 2013 at 9:32 am. I think it depends on the room(s) in question. Let’s say for instance, that both the walls and ceilings are painted in a medium to dark beige (very common right now). All the incoming light gets sucked right out of the room.
If you open up to see wall color, not only are the windows blown beyond recovery, but you also get a massive amount of flair to deal with. If you close down so that the outside is maybe +1 over exposed, the room is black, especially the dark brown sofas that are so common these days. HDR isn’t the best way to go in a large dark room with not enough incoming light. And the chromatic aberration you have to deal with is immense.
In short, there is no single solution that covers the variety I’m faced with daily. In the very same house, I may have to employ 3 different techniques, and sometimes it’s a hybrid of several of them. IMO, much of the existing natural light provides a map for how the room “feels”, but doesn’t at all light the room adequately or even interestingly. I will typically take note of both the natural and ambient light available, and then set up my small flash scheme to enhance it, sometimes as fill, and sometimes duplicating the direction, but with a better color balance then the natural light coming in (which can be blue, green, or orange). In a large great room in a cabin (30x30x16), with amber colored walls and ceiling, you really can’t bounce, and available light doesn’t always cut it either.
It’s not uncommon for me to shoot a bracketed sequence, and then do a flashed exposure from camera position that will serve as a color-blend-mode layer over the top of the rest that I can adjust the opacity to taste. That said, 90% of the time I do a 3-bracket sequence (in camera bracketing). A small flash frame followed by 2 unflashed frames. They are all RAW. The flashed frame is almost perfect, and the other two frames are used to paint in the ambiance.
With Automatic Formatting, you can create equations fast by way of selecting templates from MathType’s palettes and be plugging and be chugging information into its empty slots. MathType Crack uses mathematical spacing policies routinely as your kind. Features of MathType Crack: • More symbols and templates: has hundreds more symbols and models than Equation Editor. Beside our specific Euclid™ math fonts, you could also make use of the hundreds of math symbols in fonts already on your laptop, as well as math fonts you may download from the Internet.
Most delivered images require less then 3 minutes in post. September 25th, 2013 at 12:17 am. I need to know when a return from a shoot, that I can nail every room and exterior with a result my client likes. I couldn’t do that until I started bracketing shots and blending them in post. My wife was an infection control nurse and I’m a retired Nuclear Engineer.
We understand the meaning of “universal precautions”. Every situation/shot doesn’t necessarily need the same safe approach. But, when I get home after a shoot, I’ve got everything I need because I’ve applied the same tried and true technique to all shots. I needed to find a single technique that can render a good interior shot containing great extremes. I think the worst are scenes with dark furniture and stark white kitchens. Using flash is too iffy and cumbersome. I can’t take time for elaborate setups that may or may not render great results.
Being able to capture and utilize the full dynamic range better guarantees a great result. Anon September 30th, 2013 at 4:25 pm. @Wick Smith, Your first comment makes me think your problem lies in needing to adjust your Exposure Compensation in-camera. Honestly you should never have to crank DOWN highlights (EVER!): you should be setting your EC to -1 to -3 and then boosting highlights UP in post-processing. You have a top-of-the-line $3600 dSLR- there is absolutely NO reason why a 5D3 cannot do what you are wanting it to, it is simply knowing how to operate it. The thing of post-processing everyone needs to remember is this: anything that you lose in your shot cannot be recovered in post.
The information is either there or it isn’t. Get your settings right in the field. You can add in new info in PS, sure, but why make hours of extra work that may not even turn out right? You can also try using an ND filter but honestly, you should never need one of those indoors. They are mostly for landscape shots and wide-angle outdoor work. Hope this helps. Leave a Reply Name (required) Mail (will not be published) (required) Website (required).