BTW, I don't want to give the impression that I "invented" something here by doing HDR with a single raw file.  It's being done all over the world.  Many sites have tutorials on how to do it.  Here are just a few:

http://www.aguntherphotography.com/tutorials/raw-hdr-processing.html
http://tutorvid.com/photoshop-tutorial/creating-an-hdr-image-from-a-single-raw-file/

It'd probably look a bit "odd" keeping the sky and clouds from the first shot.  Might look cool though.  The short answer is no: the current fill in Qimage was designed to remap everything so that it remains "connected".  Obviously the data is there to do it though because both renditions came from the same raw file, so with the right tone mapping it can certainly be done.  Hey maybe that'll be the next big thing in Qimage Ultimate: tone targeted contrast mapping.   

Seth, you just repeated everything I just said.  But I think you are trying to place requirements on HDR that do not exist.  There are a number of methods of achieving HDR and taking multiple shots is not a requirement.  Some people do it that way but it is not always necessary: and the point of my post here, not as necessary as some people believe.  You could take several JPEG's and run a contrast reduction on them to create an HDR image.  When you do that, you are simply taking the dynamic range that exceeds that of a "standard" photo (one designed to be displayed on your monitor/printer) and compressing it so that it now fits into the smaller space of your monitor/printer.   Now a raw image has several stops more range than a JPEG to begin with so I could do the same thing with one raw and get the same results.

The dynamic range of the sensor is irrelevant.  And you are dead wrong that you can't expose for sky and still get good detail in the backlit landscape from one raw.  I do it all the time, and so do many others.  Here's a quick example first with standard processing and then with HDR done simply by using the fill light in Qimage's raw refine.  This is from a single raw, all processing done in Qimage Ultimate:

It really doesn't matter how you got there!  Think about it this way.  You have a point and shoot that doesn't even offer raw and I have a Canon 5D Mark II.  You take five JPEG shots on your point and shoot and you end up with a decent landscape/sky shot that you call HDR because you merged multiple photos and "crunched" the dynamic range.  

Technically, raw by itself is not even a photo.  It needs to be processed but you can process a raw in such a way that you get HDR imaging... from a single raw file.  Multiple separate exposures are not a requirement of HDR.  HDR simply refers to any technique that can give you a higher dynamic range than you would get from "standard" processing methods. 

That Apple uses a more general description for the method his program uses is common patent strategy. There are lawyers to see whether that isn't in conflict. I'm sure Apple has the better lawyers but I wouldn't call this story a hype yet.

To be honest, on the railway station I think the QU processed (one raw) is a clear winner over the HDR.  Maybe that's a bad example?  The HDR of that railway station just looks a bit "odd": almost like a painting. 

To me, raw files are already HDR.  They capture (at a minimum) four thousand times the number of colors than you can display on your monitor or in print, so in a case like this one below, you can easily just meter for the sky and then use Qimage's fill light to push the shades on the ground.  That alone (with one shot) gives you "HDR" without needing true HDR. 

Other than knowing the technical details behind HDR, I don't have much experience with it as I haven't found much real need for it.  So educate me if you will.     Anyone have any good examples of stuff you've shot that really required HDR (in the multi-shot sense)?


Raw is really not HDR.  It is just all the sensor data without the JPEG interpolation and compression.  HDR is done with two or more DIFFERENT exposures.  I think sme are using "tone mapping" and calling it HDR.
Likewise, exposing for highlights then "pulling out" the under exposed shadows with ANY program can result in a lot of shadow noise. 

Jeff,
Just tick the grid box where the blown cloud resides, and QU will reset the exposure knowing that you want the cloud marked as the main interest.
Fred

Here is my little non scientific test

1st camera jpeg
2nd Ultimate conversion - no adjustments
3rd  Ultimate - with human adjustment
4th HDR - Photomatix default and adjusted in Elements

Comments - Ultimate without adjustment gave a blown cloud, camera jpeg avoided that.  Ultimate with adjustment (exposure on top right blown area and 9 on the fill) gave better result than the camera jpeg

HDR chucked in for good measure, I don't like the 'greens' and don't know how to correct it with the Sel.!!

Hi all have just purchased a nikon  d5000 and was wondering if there was any software that will enable me to operate the camera from the laptop. have previously used a canon eos 1000 and that came with the software. But if i want to use the nikon software it is going to cost me another £1000 +.
Any ideas
Cheers Del.

I received a email from Adobe yesterday - offer upgrade my Elements 7 to CS5 at a 50% discount over £300 -  now that is still real money considering they will be offering another costly upgrade to CS6 soon.

Once is a while on my 20D Canon, if I am shooting too fast in RAW mode, I get the odd washed out ghost image in a frame, like it didn't recharge fast enough.
Fred