How do I merge two photos

[KobraCarry]

If I auto exposure bracket two or three photos, what's the easiest way to merge them, non-hdr style.

[Patti Edens]

I'm not sure I understand what you are asking, but digital blending might be what you want to do.?. There are many ways to blend two or more differently exposed photos together and the easiest way in my opinion is Photomatix software, but you can do it by hand as described in the article.

Although since you say non-HDR, I'm confused. Why would you take exposure bracketed photos if you are not trying to increase the dynamic range?

[CaptainTom]

Originally Posted by Patti Edens

I'm not sure I understand what you are asking, but digital blending might be what you want to do.?. There are many ways to blend two or more differently exposed photos together and the easiest way in my opinion is Photomatix software, but you can do it by hand as described in the article.

Although since you say non-HDR, I'm confused. Why would you take exposure bracketed photos if you are not trying to increase the dynamic range?

possibly to merge the perfectly exposed outside through the windows image with the perfectly exposed interior of the home image ...just a guess.

This is done in PS all the time. I 'm not an expert, and fumble through it. I'll defer to an expert.

[Patti Edens]

Originally Posted by CaptainTom

possibly to merge the perfectly exposed outside through the windows image with the perfectly exposed interior of the home image ...just a guess.

This is done in PS all the time. I 'm not an expert, and fumble through it. I'll defer to an expert.

Yeah, that is what increasing the dynamic range is all about. That is HDR. You expose for the highlights and expose for the shadows and then you can blend them together to get what your eyes actually see and the camera can't reproduce.

But the OP said, non-HDR, so I'm confused. Maybe the OP is talking about non-comical/overdone/otherwordly/oversaturated HDR. Now, that I understand. Some HDR treatments whether done by hand blending or by software blending can look pretty surreal.

[CaptainTom]

Originally Posted by Patti Edens

Yeah, that is what increasing the dynamic range is all about. That is HDR. You expose for the highlights and expose for the shadows and then you can blend them together to get what your eyes actually see and the camera can't reproduce.

But the OP said, non-HDR, so I'm confused. Maybe the OP is talking about non-comical/overdone/otherwordly/oversaturated HDR. Now, that I understand. Some HDR treatments whether done by hand blending or by software blending can look pretty surreal.

My guess is they are wanting to know how to put layer masks together and to then blend the two into one image .... not HDR, which would suffocate and make an average of the two already properly exposed images.

[Patti Edens]

Originally Posted by CaptainTom

My guess is they are wanting to know how to put layer masks together and to then blend the two into one image .... not HDR, which would suffocate and make an average of the two already properly exposed images.

Okay. I guess maybe one of us doesn't understand what HDR is.

I could be totally wrong. Wouldn't be the first time. But, my understanding is that it just means High Dynamic Range. And it can be achieved by taking two or more photos at different exposures and then blending those photos together to result in an image with a greater dynamic range than any one exposure could yield.

The photos can be blended together by using fancy software or they can be "hand blended" by using masks as you describe. Either way, you are getting a resulting photo that has a higher dynamic range (HDR) than any of the single exposures have. Photomatix does a great job of blending different exposures and it can be controlled so that it looks very natural.

[KobraCarry]

Thanks for the info and debate! :) I guess I"m looking for that clean, perfectly exposed photo, without all the sci-fi look to it.

[CaptainTom]

Maybe I'm not being clear.

I have taken a photo in the living room of my house with the window shades wide open. I've exposed so the inside of the living room is perfectly exposed, but of course the outside through the windows is completely blown out because of the exposure. I then take an identical image except I expose perfectly for the out side and now the inside is completely blocked up and underexposed.

I want to lay the outside exposed photo on top of the inside exposed photo so that I get a new photo that has the same inside exposure as the first and the same outside exposure of the second. I can then use the history brush to erase the top layer in the areas that I want to expose.

When I do an HDR, I combine several ranging exposure photos of the same scene and the program merges them together and the dynamic range is then adjust by the program to range from the highest highlight to the deepest shadow.

This is not what I want because I don't want to alter the inside exposure or the outside exposure. I just want to put the outside exposure in the right place in the image.

[Gambit]

You can actually the same thing, but with a single exposure. I shot this image in RAW, then processed the RAW into two different JPG images for inside and outside exposure. It's hardly perfect but illustrates the point. Is it "HDR"? I wouldn't call it so but guess it depends on your definition.

Image #1 - processed for inside.
Image #2 - processed for outside
Image #3 - "cut out" around the windows and overlaid. The funky black edges are really there and not due to my overlay!! Having said that I admit doing a poor job of it. And re-cropping so I wouldn't show the fan and wires on the left. :)

[MicWayWal]

Tom, Patti,

Both of you are right. The original exposure has a set range of tonal values. Anything done to increase that range is technically HDR. Some HDR processes create a greater range than others but either way you are still INCREASING the range capable in one exposure.

This is nothing new. It has been done even with film for a hundred years.

The human eye can see about 135 tones in a given scene. Film on average could only capture about 35 of those tones. Paper on average could only print about 10-12 of those tones. So we would exposure for the shadows with film and then when printing burn in the highlights. Increasing the tonal range or HDR of the original capture.

By the way digital on average can only capture about 12-15 tones. So HDR is getting back what film could already do.

[iCe]

Originally Posted by Gambit

You can actually the same thing, but with a single exposure. I shot this image in RAW, then processed the RAW into two different JPG images for inside and outside exposure. It's hardly perfect but illustrates the point. Is it "HDR"? I wouldn't call it so but guess it depends on your definition.

Image #1 - processed for inside.
Image #2 - processed for outside
Image #3 - "cut out" around the windows and overlaid. The funky black edges are really there and not due to my overlay!! Having said that I admit doing a poor job of it. And re-cropping so I wouldn't show the fan and wires on the left. :)

Now there's a shot most people don't get to take

[gtakacs]

This is what I could do in all of 2 minutes:



Note that even the light in the cabin now has detail. I would not advise anyone trying this with masks in Photoshop. It's called Exposure Blending and it provides a very natural looking final results. It is a great technique to use in real estate photography too.

[Gambit]

Originally Posted by iCe

Now there's a shot most people don't get to take

I was standing there trying to imagine what it would have been like when the ship was active. Failed. :) But actually anyone CAN take that shot, just go on the tour of the USS Lexington in Corpus Christi.

[iCe]

Originally Posted by Gambit

I was standing there trying to imagine what it would have been like when the ship was active. Failed. :) But actually anyone CAN take that shot, just go on the tour of the USS Lexington in Corpus Christi.

OH! I didn't know they had a Blue Angels Hornet on the Lex. It's been a while since I've been there... and I didn't see the jetty... Nice CS work btw