An extreme example: Imagine that you are trying to get a good picture of someone arc welding at night outside.  You would need to at least take a picture of them fast enough so that the light from the arc doesn't obliterate everything else in the picture, and then you would need to get a picture slow enough so that it could capture everything that isn't being lit by the light of the welder, then you would need to take a normal picture to pick up everything that is at a normal light level.

In the above example you will be taking pictures at the extreme ends of your camera's exposure limits in order to get a proper spread of images for your HDR and your camera probably won't allow enough spread to do it automatically since the image to covert the dark parts may require a few seconds of exposure to properly expose the darker parts of the image.

Brian Cluff

Best results for HDR is to expose for the sky, then expose for the shadows then exposed for your subject/middle areas. As opposed to just picking a range.

On Jul 21, 2016 10:15 PM, "Michael" <bmike1@gmail.com> wrote:

I've been wondering: How is using more than three different exposures beneficial? Should you have an odd number of exposures with EV 0 being the one in the middle?

What is the best EV separation (+/- 1, +/- 5, +/- 10)? Or is it more trial and error?

--

:-)~MIKE~(-:

---------------------------------------------------
PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org
To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings:
http://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss

---------------------------------------------------
PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org
To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings:
http://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss