I agree with Ansel Adams when he said, \’I can look at a fine art photograph and sometimes I can hear music.\’…

The thing no one here is considering is this….

Ok so if you use the same images on the 4 programs then shouldn’t the hdr file come out the same? Well yes it should but each program adds it’s own default settings and that is what you are all comparing but really that shouldn’t be it.

Now if you are the type to add the photos and hit process and then go “OMG!!!!! OMG!!!!! LOOK I MADE AN HDR!!!!!!!” then yes maybe you should go with the one that makes the best “out of the box” image. But generally speaking this isn’t the “selling point”. Where a hdr program should shine is what you can do with the file after the merge.

A merged HDR file has basically the same info in it no matter what program you use to do it. For example most times i let photomatix do the merge and save the .hdr file, other times I will go into bridge and then merge to a .hdr file and then edit it with photomatix. And the thing is that it doesn’t matter which .hdr file i use the results come out the same.

So when I say that I like photomatix it is because of all the control it gives you AFTER the hdr merge & that extra control lets you create much better details & personalization than bracketeer or hydra, since they just basically give you the barebones to do it.

I should also mention, for Bracketeer’s and Photomatix’s “realistic” renders, I processed those with default settings, right out of the box. With Hydra, I made slight adjustments to *improve* the final image. You can see that Hydra is lacking, the final image looks dark and dull compared to Bracketeer’s.

Here’s a comparison of Bracketeer vs Photomatix Pro.

This is a “realistic” HDR photo done in Bracketeer. This is simple exposure blending, not tonemapping. Some people may not be able to tell it’s HDR, but the dead giveaway is the fact that the window isn’t one big blown out highlight. Everything is within a decent visible dynamic range.

http://img521.imageshack.us/img521/1493/hdrrealisticik7.jpg

This next one is also a “realistic” (exposure blended) photo, done in Photomatix Pro. I personally feel the Bracketeer photo looks better, but to each his own.

http://img61.imageshack.us/img61/5298/ppblendedtg4.jpg

Lastly, this is an “artsy” (tonemapped) HDR done in Photomatix Pro.

http://img292.imageshack.us/img292/5559/pptonemappedax6.jpg

Hope this helps.

And Photoshop CS3’s HDR feature should definitely be included in the Showdown, as it’s such a universally used program, but I find Bracketeer produces better results than PS. But I would love to read the review comparing all the available HDR programs!!! Bring it On, Macapper!

I guess I should have also said that IMO photomatix gives you more control and can produce more realistic hdr’s than the other tools and also gives you additional controls to stylize your hdr’s.

So before you say things like “but this has nothing to do with hdr.” please make sure you know what you are talking about because apparently you only think there is only 1 acceptable output of an hdr which is not true at all.

“So Greg if there is a shootout, please stick to HDR …”
Basically what you are asking is to not only compare the the hdr programs but to also limit them to only one aspect or feature of what is available to hdr photographers, which seams rather silly to me.

Don’t forget that ps cs3 also does hdr.

http://a100.ac-images.myspacecdn.com/images01/87/l_a0815b95d6b5cd2c055b1738db20023b.jpg

What i have come to find is that photomatix just blows the other 2 away for either realistic or artsy.. personally i like the artsy ones and below are examples and all were done in less that 5 minutes.. that includes shooting merging and editing in photomatix & without any editing done in photoshop, the other 2 just can’t do this kinda stuff..

http://viewmorepics.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=viewImage&friendID=2560428&albumID=606680&imageID=37445578

http://a522.ac-images.myspacecdn.com/images01/77/l_e2f39b951321e7261735a6e0cd3da039.jpg

http://a506.ac-images.myspacecdn.com/images01/49/l_953b99e6e43088c45afb05b2189b7401.jpg
http://a770.ac-images.myspacecdn.com/images01/67/l_701ad95b42d824e89af5ab0ac3ae7889.jpg

Look out for a HDR showdown post between Bracketeer, Hydra and Photomatix in the next few weeks.

Give Bracketeer a try, it’s super easy. Just drag/drop images into the window, optionally align the images (if not shot on a tripod), and hit “go”! Can’t beat the price, on top of that. I found it even easier than Hydra and it yields better results IMO.

@CaptSaltyJack: I just found that with Hydra it was more of a step by step process, making it easier for the end user to produce a result. I tried Photomatix but never really got anywhere with it. If you are looking to have more control over your photos, or have the know-how (or read the manual) to use Photomatix, then it may be better for your needs. In the end, it was just easier to produce an HDR with Hydra than with Photomatix, at least for me.

Hydra was the worst. The results it yielded were mediocre at best.
Photomatix Pro: great app, especially for “artistic” HDR effects via tonemapping. It is a bit daunting at first, just spend time experimenting with settings and *read the manual*!!
Bracketeer: this is a GUI front-end for Enfuse, a free HDR app. Bracketeer is $40 I think, and yields the best “realistic” HDR results. Photomatix is cool for those artsy HDRs, where I feel Bracketeer will get you more true-to-life results.

I use both Bracketeer and Photomatix Pro.

And about HDRs, generally, HDR seems pretty realistic. It seems like you were looking at the scene by your own eye. But – it has a downfall – HDR lacks that artistic look of good old photography. You can’t play with light and shadows in HDR as it is designed to display both equally. However, HDR is great for nature sceneries.