HDR actually works pretty well.

[theautopilot]

You should really do a little more research before making such bold statements! Seriously.

Thanks for the link. I stand corrected.

I have tested it with fast moving objects and concluded it could not be true HDR. I have done a lot of HDR work before. I also read elsewhere it was "fake" HDR.

If this is the case, that's cool. Im happy to admit im wrong. But i am simply amazed that the iPhone can take 3 shots so quickly. It's faster than most SLRs I have used, and I was a professional photographer before teaching. There must be something else going on too. Maybe that's why the effect is so pronounced.

I would love to know how Apple are working this.

 

[Hemmo]

these hdr fights have been going on for many years ,but imho HDR photo can be done even with 1 raw file (thats why i want raw in iP4) just change photos ev.That comes handy when you are shooting something fast object or you are moving fast,like when trey ratcliff was shooting Chigaco from moving helicopter heres more about that:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/stuckincustoms/3764925866/



so you can make hdr with 2 photos but it usually dosent produce great outcom.

 

[smiddlehurst]

Hey, just thought it worth posting these. Was down in London yesterday evening and happened upon the perfect chance to test the iPhone's HDR capabilities.

The pic is shot in front of the Hammersmith Apollo around 18:30. The sun is setting just behind the flyover and isn't quite in shot and the billboard is actually a screen so quite brightly backlit. There is surprisingly little artificial light at this spot (well, at that time anyway) and the result is a scene that looks pretty damn good in real life but is a pig to catch on camera, doubly so on a cameraphone. The shot was focused (and I think I'm right in saying, exposed) on the billboard to the right of the building. I didn't spend ages setting up the shot as I deliberately wanted to use the camera in the same way that most regular people would (i.e. point, tap, shoot) and put a lot less effort into composition etc than I normally would.

The HDR shot (on the right) shows a massively improved image with almost all of the image exposed well enough to pass muster. The area underneath the flyover now shows a fair amount of detail and the building to the left shows a great deal more detail. The sky is slightly improved although still not realistic but frankly I'm not sure you'd get much better anyway considering you're basically shooting such a bright light source. Of course the shot is handheld and as it was a quick snap I admit I didn't try and steady it as well as I should have but even so there's very little blurring. The billboard is also vastly improved and is actually legible in the HDR shot.

Now for the bad news, although it does prove that there's multiple shots going on here and all you have to do is look at the bikes. In the non-HDR shot, the rider with the hi-vis jacket just to the right of the sign on the building is more-or-less frozen by the shutter. In the HDR shot however they appear to be phasing in and out of this reality. Same with the bike in the foreground. There's also a slight loss in clarity, although that's more likely to be my hands moving than anything else.

So, to wrap this up, this is a decent example of how HDR should, and should not, be used. Moving objects, by and large, bad idea. Scenes with a large contrast range and mostly comprised of objects not terribly likely to move however can benefit greatly. It seems clear that the iPhone is indeed taking multiple shots and that, providing you're not trying to take a lot of shots quickly, it's probably worth leaving on most of the time, you can always chuck the HDR shot if you don't want it.

 

[jebbe]

I think people are still missing the point that this is a phone with this capability. No it's not meant to match the expensive cameras and software that exist out there.

Just take it for what it is

 

[Gizmotoy]

these hdr fights have been going on for many years ,but imho HDR photo can be done even with 1 raw file (thats why i want raw in iP4) just change photos ev.That comes handy when you are shooting something fast object or you are moving fast,like when trey ratcliff was shooting Chigaco from moving helicopter heres more about that:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/stuckincustoms/3764925866/



so you can make hdr with 2 photos but it usually dosent produce great outcom.

Not really. If you're only using one picture, there's absolutely no reason to even think of HDR. You'll get better results, and have far more control, by simply learning to properly level a photograph (the Curves feature in Photoshop, if you use that).

There's a bunch of tutorials online.

Now if you want a single photo to have that "HDR look" with the blending imperfections, then the technique you mentioned would be advantageous. But from a technical perspective, you're better off with Curves.

 

[err404]

these hdr fights have been going on for many years ,but imho HDR photo can be done even with 1 raw file (thats why i want raw in iP4) just change photos ev.That comes handy when you are shooting something fast object or you are moving fast,like when trey ratcliff was shooting Chigaco from moving helicopter heres more about that:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/stuckincustoms/3764925866/



so you can make hdr with 2 photos but it usually dosent produce great outcom.

While you can make a similar look with the method you describe, the bright and dark areas will be grainy and lack detail. The sensor simply can not cleanly capture that much range in a single exposure. RAW helps since JPG will clip more data from the under and over exposed areas, but these areas wont looks great even in RAW. Even though a large format DSLR will do much better, it can still benefit HDR.
In general HDR is the process is not the final result. Multiple shots are merged together into a single image with a range so wide that typical monitors can not properly display them. The bright and dark areas in this image contains the extra detail from the shot best exposed for it's brightness.
With this image as a starting point you can generate a dynamic tone-mapped image with far more detail in all areas of the image then if just a single RAW image was used.

So, to wrap this up, this is a decent example of how HDR should, and should not, be used. Moving objects, by and large, bad idea. Scenes with a large contrast range and mostly comprised of objects not terribly likely to move however can benefit greatly. It seems clear that the iPhone is indeed taking multiple shots and that, providing you're not trying to take a lot of shots quickly, it's probably worth leaving on most of the time, you can always chuck the HDR shot if you don't want it.

FYI - I does an OK job with motion in brighter shots. Still, I'm glad that they save both versions to the roll.

 

[Hemmo]

Not really. If you're only using one picture, there's absolutely no reason to even think of HDR. You'll get better results, and have far more control, by simply learning to properly level a photograph (the Curves feature in Photoshop, if you use that).

There's a bunch of tutorials online.

Now if you want a single photo to have that "HDR look" with the blending imperfections, then the technique you mentioned would be advantageous. But from a technical perspective, you're better off with Curves.

DID you even look at that photo i linked?! shooting straight i to the morning sun while flying in helicopter? I can bet that that hdr is better looking that one with just curve adjustments.

err404: yeah i know its not best technic but again if you look at that photo i linked theres no noise or grain..

and im not saying its great to make hdr with 1 raw exposure but sometimes thats way better than normal ps adjustments.btw when im shooting hdrs i usually 3-9 exposures depending what kind of look im looking for.

but to the iPhone 4 brilliant camera, pro hdr and true hdr usually dosent work for me imho the make too much noise and halos.But i havent really done too extensive tests with them.

 

[todd2000]

I hope these aren't showing up HUGE for everyone. I downsized the images to 1024x768 but they load up HUGE on all 3 browsers on my computer. *sigh*

You might want to run, there is a Mushroom Cloud over your house!


On topic, I think the HDR does a nice job of improving certain pictures.

 

[err404]

and im not saying its great to make hdr with 1 raw exposure but sometimes thats way better than normal ps adjustments.btw when im shooting hdrs i usually 3-9 exposures depending what kind of look im looking for.

It's really just a semantic issue at this point. Your right; with a good DSLR (CCD), a single exposure will probably capture detail in at least as wide a range as the iPhone 4 using HDR (CMOS). Creating your tone-mapped image from an iPhone HDR or single RAW DSLR image will likely result in very similar images.
So the question is the method. Is HDR defined by the captured range, or the process? The term HDR has historically referred to the process of combining images to overcome limitation of the hardware, but I understand your point that the specifics of the method are irrelevant so long as you are capturing the wide range.

 

[Habakuk]

Interesting article on HDR Video in German mag Spiegel. Anyway you'll find the video links. Produced with DSLR cams and heavy photoshopping.

iPhone 4? iPhone 5? When will we be able to produce HDR video as simple as possible?

 

[err404]

Interesting article on HDR Video in German mag Spiegel. Anyway you'll find the video links. Produced with DSLR cams and heavy photoshopping.

iPhone 4? iPhone 5? When will we be able to produce HDR video as simple as possible?

I suppose they could make a filter to add a similar tone-mapped effect, but this video was accomplished by using two cameras to film the scene. They processed the results from both to create HDR frames which were then tone-mapped.
Since HDR typically refers to the process of merging multiple exposures, they would not be able to do this on the iPhone unless a second camera was added to the back (or a massive increase in shutter spee/FPS). That said, if 3D filming takes off, I wouldn't be surprised if a second (off-set) camera is added down the road, but that would be too far off to speculate.

BTW- I thought that video looked terrible.