Aerial HDR Photography using a UAV with Aurora HDR 2019, part 2

[CP Anson]

This is an article I wrote for Photofocus.com. I hope this is helpful.


This article consists of 2 parts. This is part 2 of 2. Read part 1.

In this 2 part article, we’re going to explore creating a 3 image HDR in Aurora 2019. I’m using RAW photographs from my Inspire 2 X5S camera shot in DNG RAW shooting AEB (auto exposure bracketing) mode taking 3 photographs. One challenge in shooting multiple exposures with a drone is that there can be a slight change of position between the photographs, even at faster shutter speeds because of GPS drift, wind, and other variables. Because of this, I will use a high ghost removal setting when Aurora HDR 2019 processes and combines the 3 photographs into a single HDR version. Another challenge with the DJI DNG RAW is that it can take a lot more work to create a good looking photograph from it. Let’s see how Aurora HDR 2019 does!


You'll find the full article here:
Aerial HDR Photography using a UAV with Aurora HDR 2019, part 2 | Photofocus

 

[davidjmurray]

One challenge in shooting multiple exposures with a drone is that there can be a slight change of position between the photographs, even at faster shutter speeds because of GPS drift, wind, and other variables. Because of this, I will use a high ghost removal setting when Aurora HDR 2019 processes and combines the 3 photographs into a single HDR version.

Thanks for the nice report/article. I'd be curious to know if you've worked with Photomatix Pro also. And if so, what strengths you think Aurora 2019 has over it. Perhaps I've missed something.

I have been using other HDR sw packages for years, and tried Aurora based on Part 1 of your article several weeks ago. I did not seen any great advantage in Aurora over my tool of choice, Photomatix Pro, and one great disadvantage, which is Aurora's lack of good batch processing. My normal work flow involves batch hdr processing an entire sequence of photos taken during a flight as a first pass, and then hand processing final selects as needed. With Photomatix Pro this is easy to do as a single batch job, and I can do something else while the batch is running. For many of my less demanding customers/applications the results from Photomatix batch processing alone look fine, and can be delivered directly to customers with just a few tweaks in LR, if any. BTW, please don't get the idea I'm just a hack here.... I do high end work too...corporate installations, multi-million dollar properties, magazine work, etc. For those I hand blend a mix of hdr-processed and raw images in photoshop to produce final result. But many of my customers just don't need/want/care about that, and don't want to pay for it.

And, just a nit...you say that you use a "high ghost removal setting" to compensate for drone movement while shooting the bracketed set. Maybe Aurora's ghost removal feature fixes camera movement, but in all of the other HDR programs I've used, ghost removal means something else: it is to deal with objects shifting positions within the frame from pic to pic, such as cars moving along a road, people walking, flags flapping, etc. In those types of situations ghosting happens even when the camera is bolted to a granite post, and the sw strategies to deal with those ghosts are not appropriate for dealing with camera movement. Other programs compensate for camera movement with a feature usually called something like "Image Alignment".

 

[CP Anson]

Thanks for the nice report/article. I'd be curious to know if you've worked with Photomatix Pro also. And if so, what strengths you think Aurora 2019 has over it. Perhaps I've missed something.

I have been using other HDR sw packages for years, and tried Aurora based on Part 1 of your article several weeks ago. I did not seen any great advantage in Aurora over my tool of choice, Photomatix Pro, and one great disadvantage, which is Aurora's lack of good batch processing. My normal work flow involves batch hdr processing an entire sequence of photos taken during a flight as a first pass, and then hand processing final selects as needed. With Photomatix Pro this is easy to do as a single batch job, and I can do something else while the batch is running. For many of my less demanding customers/applications the results from Photomatix batch processing alone look fine, and can be delivered directly to customers with just a few tweaks in LR, if any. BTW, please don't get the idea I'm just a hack here.... I do high end work too...corporate installations, multi-million dollar properties, magazine work, etc. For those I hand blend a mix of hdr-processed and raw images in photoshop to produce final result. But many of my customers just don't need/want/care about that, and don't want to pay for it.

And, just a nit...you say that you use a "high ghost removal setting" to compensate for drone movement while shooting the bracketed set. Maybe Aurora's ghost removal feature fixes camera movement, but in all of the other HDR programs I've used, ghost removal means something else: it is to deal with objects shifting positions within the frame from pic to pic, such as cars moving along a road, people walking, flags flapping, etc. In those types of situations ghosting happens even when the camera is bolted to a granite post, and the sw strategies to deal with those ghosts are not appropriate for dealing with camera movement. Other programs compensate for camera movement with a feature usually called something like "Image Alignment".

David,

Thanks for you feedback and insights. Let me address your comment about using High Ghosting to compensate for camera movement. You are correct and I was incorrect in what I said in the video. De-hosting only helps to remove objects shifting or moving from each shot to the next. And yes, if you have slightly different positions, de-ghosting will not help that. It will require aligning this images in Photoshop or other tools before doing the HDR process. I appreciate you catching that!

As for Aurora HDR 2019 versus Photomatrix Pro, I do not have experience with that. Let me reach out and see what other authors have experience and may be able to give you feedback.

In regards to the batch processing, I know they are working on that feature and we should see that in future updates. We'll have to wait to see if it is up to the level that you require as those updates come out. I don't have any time frames regarding them. Here is a link to the current page on batch processing.
Batch Processing Files

Also, you sound like a professional who has experience doing this work, who is articulate and knowledgeable. I took your comments seriously.

Also is there an email I can send to my editors with your question for replies on Photomatrix Pro vs Aurora HDR 2019?

Thanks, Chris

 

[davidjmurray]

Also, you sound like a professional who has experience doing this work, who is articulate and knowledgeable. I took your comments seriously.

Likewise! In general I find the level of discourse in this forum to be very positive, civil, knowledgable, and cooperative. It's why I keep coming back! I almost always learn something, and I try to contribute when I can. Happy holidays.

 

[vfrailing]

Thanks for the nice report/article. I'd be curious to know if you've worked with Photomatix Pro also. And if so, what strengths you think Aurora 2019 has over it. Perhaps I've missed something.

I have been using other HDR sw packages for years, and tried Aurora based on Part 1 of your article several weeks ago. I did not seen any great advantage in Aurora over my tool of choice, Photomatix Pro, and one great disadvantage, which is Aurora's lack of good batch processing. My normal work flow involves batch hdr processing an entire sequence of photos taken during a flight as a first pass, and then hand processing final selects as needed. With Photomatix Pro this is easy to do as a single batch job, and I can do something else while the batch is running. For many of my less demanding customers/applications the results from Photomatix batch processing alone look fine, and can be delivered directly to customers with just a few tweaks in LR, if any. BTW, please don't get the idea I'm just a hack here.... I do high end work too...corporate installations, multi-million dollar properties, magazine work, etc. For those I hand blend a mix of hdr-processed and raw images in photoshop to produce final result. But many of my customers just don't need/want/care about that, and don't want to pay for it.

And, just a nit...you say that you use a "high ghost removal setting" to compensate for drone movement while shooting the bracketed set. Maybe Aurora's ghost removal feature fixes camera movement, but in all of the other HDR programs I've used, ghost removal means something else: it is to deal with objects shifting positions within the frame from pic to pic, such as cars moving along a road, people walking, flags flapping, etc. In those types of situations ghosting happens even when the camera is bolted to a granite post, and the sw strategies to deal with those ghosts are not appropriate for dealing with camera movement. Other programs compensate for camera movement with a feature usually called something like "Image Alignment".

Thank you, David and CP, for your articles and reply. I also use Photomatix, and employ the batch HDR 95% of the time. I do this with all my drone still work, as well as my other land based photography, usually with a Sony mirrorless. My main request from DJI is to give more lattitude in the AEB settings, to allow a wider spread. Currently, you get a fixed +/_ .67 stop spread, whereas my Sony gives me much more choices. I would love to see a 1 or even 2 fstop spread, which would give landscapes much more ability to reach into the shadows and highlights. Here is a recent twilight aerial with Inspire 2 , X7 24mm lens, with a 5 shot AEB spread processed in Photomatix, along with the normal images.