My question is is -3, 0, +3 produce different result than -3, -2,-1,0,+1,+2,+3. I heard it produce better HDR result by doing 1 exposure interval than 2 or 3 exposure interval.

Thanks! And very interesting. Now more and when I am out on assignment for real estate agents, I have with me ONLY a tripod and a camera, not even a flash. Usually there is only ONE exposure (per angle), but if there are windows involved, there can be two. It is enough. As these are RAW files, all necessary sources can be developed from these few exposures. So very few exposures (good basic knowledge with the camera), good technology in Camera-RAW to produce the sources, then have a good blending technology - mabye a sky replacement need to be done - soon ready for delivery. It's easy to make it difficult, it's hard to make it easy - but you learn over time, this is called experience.

Can’t wait for capture one to have photo merge tech with layers for exposure blending with full control. 🤞

Thank you so much Aaron for taking the time to share this tutorial. As usual your tutorials are always very instructive and to the point. I downloaded your files as suggested and processed them in Photoshop. I used the ghosting option and all the flags were perfect. Unbelievable! I was thinking of purchasing Aurora HDR but now I see it can very well be done in Photoshop.

You used a camera that already has amazing dynamic range.

thankyou phlearn 👍🏻👍🏻

Excellent, learned a lot here. Thanks

What's the difference between the one exposure HDR and just using that same RAW but tweaking the highlights and shadows value?

In the 9 exposure image you also altered the shadows but then you only synced the exposure. That's why the 9 exposure image looks significantly differrent. Unfortunately this makes it a bit harder to compare the results.

Helps to start with a good dynamic range camera, so even the single image will have a lot of details at the extremes. I also wonder if the process of merging is "averaging out" some of the shadow noise? Even without multi images, you could easily have an image that would be acceptable for many uses.

This is a helpful demonstration of HDR, thanks. I agree with your conclusions, and what you see on the camera you used becomes even more obvious when using cameras with smaller sensors, since they have more noise. The Sony RX10m4 has 20MP on a 1" sensor, so each pixel receptor is much smaller compared to most full frame types. Smaller receptor means smaller signal (less light) and so more image noise since it is all about signal to noise ratio, and the dark areas have therefore the most perceived image noise. How HDR helps here is like you say, the longer exposures in the series bring in more light, so higher signal to noise ratios for the dark areas. So, better looking photos at the expense of more processing time to get the completed image. I typically use 9 exposures at 1 stop each and jpegs, because each storage card can store thousand of images, and it works well even in low light.

If it was a night scene you would definitely see the difference

Thanks for doing all the work so we can take the credit in our photos!

Great video but you need to use older cameras to make this more useful. Most people doesnt have a7r4, maybe some canon 5d mk iv and nikon d750 would be best to show this process.

Minimum 2 or 3 rapidfire bracketed exposures if there is little to no movement. Check the histogram to know for sure. Ideally more like 5-7, or even 9 especially if there are movement problems that can be managed with stacking algorithms. This is especially true with public spaces or weather/wind/clouds to consider.

Much amazing info. thankyou

Great video. I´ve learned a lot.

Thanks PHLEARN...

So I guess to get rid of the ghosts by composing, you would use elements from the original different exposure shots and chose depending on the placing of the object regarding its dynamic range from which shot you would compose it?

Now I know what to do with that one single image I have that I wish I took on HDR mode.

Using single image and then applying the Topaz Labs Denoise AI pluggin to it would probably net some really great results as well.

I think there will be more of a difference at night and on a cheaper camera. I’d love to see a comparison when using a cheap entry level Canon Camera.

now do a 32 images Exposures HDR.. :P

I love you Aaron :)

sir ur website(phlearn Pro) is facing security issues,,,plzz fix it

It depends on the situation, but I usually get more than enough out of three exposures, and even that is more often then not overkill with a7RIV.

Thank you aaron

Re: The flag issue: I have rarely done compositing in Photoshop but could muddle through it. My question is can you simply use a virtual copy one of the bracketed images in PS to make the composite work or do you need a stand alone image for that? Do you have a video about how to do simple compositing such as this or when focus stacking and movement of leaves, grass, is an issue

Interesting video and I think the basic concept was fairly addressed. However it does seem a bit unfair to compare a 3 bracket vs a 9 bracket with the same dynamic range between the set. In other words, I would never shoot a 3 bracket HDR with each frame 2.7 stops apart, but that's what you're comparing here. I actually think what we need here is three different tests - One test which looks at HDR performance changing the number of brackets but holding the total dynamic range constant (eg 3,5,7 brackets with 5 stops total of dynamic range), another test which holds the number of brackets constant but changes the total dynamic range (eg. 5 bracket HDR 1/3 stop apart, 2/3 stop apart, and 1 stop apart), and finally another where both are changed. I think that would be the most telling. Also, do the same test in very bright conditions, normal conditions (eg well lit interior) and dark conditions (eg. dusk or poor indoor lighting).

Thanks Aaron for another great video. You look much better now than recently. You seem less tired buddy. Btw I am a huge fan of your pro phlearn tutorials.

I'm going to go out today and try a 3 and a 9 exposure, just to try it out.

did you check different hdr software in addition to lr?

The bumped exposures where very different voor the 1 exposure image vs 9 exposure image. Also what about sharpness. The 9 exposure image is very soft. I think you did not use align. If you use heavy noise reduction on the 1 exposure you maybe can achieve the same soft result as the non aligned 9 exposure. Wondering if align improves the sharpness and photo overall.

If there are moving objects like cars or people, this could be handy.

For my photographer stand point, the Sony a7r4 is the best in class at dynamic range. I find it not so educational for you to compare the already good file that you can get for that camera. You can try to use old canon 5dMK2, you'll find to a lot harder to handle a single image for HDR compare to multiple exposure photos HDR for far way better result. Interestingly, I always prefer a sharper, more details image than noise level(if it is not that bad) which I am confusing about how and why the multiple HDR photos you make, look less sharp as it should be as sharp as a single HDR photo. Thank you for your video.

Good video but with THAT camera, it doesnt make sense. MFT, Crop or older version of Sony Alpha like rII would make sense. Now we have huge sensors With advanced chipsets so it can capture a lot of "loseless" data. The test doesnt show real working with cameras, thats all.

I think with the dynamic range of today's top cameras you don't really need multiple exposures to get a very good result as seen in the video. To me the difference even between 1 and 9 look marginal. It would be interesting though to do the same experiment with a cheaper camera!

Premiere=Dislike Multiple Premiere=Unsubscribe Premieres should only be used for live content. Otherwise it’s pretentious.

Shooting RAW isn't enough?

But... you only compare the completely automated process of one random HDR converter. This tells us nothing about the dynamic range you could actually extract from a given stack. You give a random example of how LR behaves under certain conditions. If you would do it manually with a brush it would still be HDR. Maybe tedious, but I would not be surprised if the DR would look even more similar. Couldn't you further darken the sky in the single file?

Now compare it with a pixel 4 with extended HDR+ mode

The answer is 9. Jk I don’t know

i hope you had security with you walking the streets of Chicago

HDR is for old folks. It’s so tacky.

HDR is horrible, my answer to your question is zero