LR HDR vs Enfuse

[John Liddle]

I have just downloaded and installed the Enfuse plugin for LR and made a composite image to compare the results of this as against LR's own HDR processing.

The two images are 7-shot composites, with identical sharpening and defringing after they have been overlaid.

The LR HDR image is on the left.

I think I prefer the Enfuse version - what think you?

(And yes, I do know that I cut off the top of the nearest sequoia)

HDR-Enfuse comparison by John Liddle, on Flickr

[tesarver]

Re: LR HDR vs Enfuse

It's a toss up for me John


Tom

[Colin]

Re: LR HDR vs Enfuse

Very close but I prefer the LR one.

[paulr5604]

Re: LR HDR vs Enfuse

If I'm honest I can't see any difference they both look the same to me

[ST-EOS]

Re: LR HDR vs Enfuse

The enfuse version has deeper colour in the sky John and seems to have more detail/contrast in the top of the three taller trees on the right hand side.

[Tigger]

Re: LR HDR vs Enfuse

The enfuse version has deeper colour in the sky John and seems to have more detail/contrast in the top of the three taller trees on the right hand side.

agree - just edges it for me

makes you wonder how the same image would stand against the two main programs - HDR Efex & photomatix ?

[Fr1so]

Re: LR HDR vs Enfuse

The one on the left has some contrast. By both of the photo's I can't see any HDR effects ...

[John Liddle]

Re: LR HDR vs Enfuse

Thanks to all who have looked and responded.

The enfuse version has deeper colour in the sky John and seems to have more detail/contrast in the top of the three taller trees on the right hand side.

I agree Peter, although overall, the image mau be a bit too light (but that could easily be adjusted).

agree - just edges it for me

makes you wonder how the same image would stand against the two main programs - HDR Efex & photomatix ?

As you know Ian, your wish is my command! - Well nearly - I cannot provide the result from HDR Efex since I do not have the program. However, the composite image below features (L to R) Lightroom, Enfuse and Photomatix essentials. They have had the same treatment, but the Photomatix version is based on only 5 of the 7 shots (a limit of the Essentials version I suspect) and is their "Balanced" preset. I think this preset makes the sky a bit lurid (but the rest is nice) - perhaps I should have chosen the "Photographic" preset instead.

Hope this helps

3-way HDR comparison by John Liddle, on Flickr

[Tigger]

Re: LR HDR vs Enfuse

thanks John - the Photomatix is a lot deeper and other than the odd blue sky does look better

I was thinking about buying Photomatix, so interesting test thanks

[El Sid]

Re: LR HDR vs Enfuse

Enfuse seems to have handle the highlights a bit more sympathetically and the greens look a little more natural but there's not much in it. If I had to choose I think I slightly prefer the Enfuse version...

I suspect the Photomatix Essentials program is designed to give the more casual or inexperienced user a ready to print image though the 'Balanced' option does seem to have resulted in a bit of a cheap postcard style colour scheme...

[EightBitTony]

Re: LR HDR vs Enfuse

I like Lightroom, because the result of the HDR is still RAW, so you can continue tweaking it without losing any quality. Not sure if the others offer the same feature - I assume they produce TIFF or something?

[John Liddle]

Re: LR HDR vs Enfuse

Hi Tony,

They both offer TIFF or jpg output.