I'm not sure about PS making wrong relative exposure calculations though. leaves) are greatly dispaced from each shot. I honestly cannot detect any ghosting in most of the HDR images I took, unless the objects in the picture (eg. In both lighting was kept reasonably natural, without producing visible inconsistencies like those usually found on Photomatix tone mapped images.ДЇinally just a proof of the need of doing several shots to cover the entire dynamic range, showing the noise comparision between the most exposed shot that preserved the highlights and the final fused image: However regarding local contrast TuFuse produced a more natural result while SNS-HDR obtained more texture where available, resulting a bit more unreal. The resulting image with default parameters was finished with a standard contrast curve:Д«oth programs respected the colours of the initial image, SNS-HDR saturating a bit. To do the automated tone mapping, several replicas of the ZN image were fed into TuFuse and SNS-HDR Lite. The resulting image histogram reveals about 13,5EV of dynamic range (the highlights peak corresponds to the tungsten lamps and their reflections): The gray tones in the following blending map indicate the source RAW used for every image area: The RAW files were optimally fused using Zero Noise. The outdoor highlights would have got blown a bit and the deep shadows would have become a bit less noisefree, but the final result would have been almost as good. Just the central 3 shots could have been used. To capture the entire dynamic range of the scene I used 5 shots 2EV apart: I made a comparision between TuFuse with default parameters vs SNS-HDR Lite for HDR tone mapping.

Sns hdr home download