# HDR from Lr Virtual Copies



## mikecox (Jun 23, 2015)

I recently discovered, by accident, that I could create a HDR image using the original image and two virtual copies from Lr.  It's how I created this HDR image.








But now I can't do it again!  

I exported three images from Lr to Photomatix but when I tried it again the changes I made in the virtual copies didn't appear when they were imported. All the images were exactly the same, even though in Lr the the exposure appeared over/under/and normal.

Are there some naming conventions that need to be considered with virtual copies and why why the edited images import without the edits?


----------



## clee01l (Jun 23, 2015)

Yes, each export needs to have a unique name.  I rename on Export and include the copy name along with the file name in the Exported file naming template.  With LR6, you can do the HDR without exporting But you always need different exposure settings on each virtual/master copy.


----------



## mikecox (Jun 23, 2015)

clee01l said:


> Yes, each export needs to have a unique name.  I rename on Export and include the copy name along with the file name in the Exported file naming template.  With LR6, you can do the HDR without exporting But you always need different exposure settings on each virtual/master copy.


Thanks for helping with this. 

I just tried to rename virtual copies.  I selected the original and the two VC I made, but the filenames don't change.  The only indication that this was a copy is the "Copy Number" field of the metadata.  

But your suggestions works, using the Export option; with it's file renaming option , as apposed to the Edit in option where there is no renaming option.

That leaves me wondering about fine naming conventions for Virtual copies.  They don't seem to respond to convention "F2" renaming open.  Is there something about VC that they are allowed to be renamed using "rename"?

btw I realize Lr does HDR but Photomatix does it so much better with it's amazing presets and find tuning controls.  But I will check it out for "down and dirty" HDR fixes; since it might ve faster since it is more direct.


----------



## clee01l (Jun 24, 2015)

I use this naming template on all of my exports. "{Filename}.{Copy name}_LR"  A master file is named "IMG_1234._LR.jpg".  A virtual copy is named "IMG_1234.Copy1_LR.jpg"  Each exported file gets a unique name.  The last three chars (_LR) tells me the files was generated by LR.


----------



## mikecox (Jun 24, 2015)

clee01l said:


> I use this naming template on all of my exports. "{Filename}.{Copy name}_LR"  A master file is named "IMG_1234._LR.jpg".  A virtual copy is named "IMG_1234.Copy1_LR.jpg"  Each exported file gets a unique name.  The last three chars (_LR) tells me the files was generated by LR.


I played around today and discovered all I have to do is create 2 virtual copies and export them; which is when I rename them, sequentially.

I was excited to now that I could either export them to Photomatix without changing them at all because Photomatix asks how much I want eat image exposed + ro _.  Or, I can to the adjustments myself and Photomatix will work with those settings.  Why would anyone bother to bracket images with this option?


----------



## Jimmsp (Jun 24, 2015)

mikecox said:


> .....  Why would anyone bother to bracket images with this option?



Your camera has a limited dynamic range that it can capture. Bracketing extends that real dynamic range, where what you are doing is trying to mimic it by darkening the highlights and brightening the shadows of a single capture. You cannot recover blown highlights with non bracketing. 
In addition, you get less noise in the shadow areas via real bracketing.


----------



## mikecox (Jun 24, 2015)

Jimmsp said:


> Your camera has a limited dynamic range that it can capture. Bracketing extends that real dynamic range, where what you are doing is trying to mimic it by darkening the highlights and brightening the shadows of a single capture. You cannot recover blown highlights with non bracketing.
> In addition, you get less noise in the shadow areas via real bracketing.


Thanks for sharing that, now I see why people bother to bracket (-:  

But I've gotten some pretty passable results using the virtual copy technique.  So when I am looking for the best results I will bracket.  

I do at lot of night work, photographing concerts with lots of stage lights but bringing out whats in the shadows, off stage, is difficult with bracketing because there isn't usually enough light for the underexposed image and I need a tripod in such low light, so making a virtual copy is a down and dirty technique for getting those under exposed shot in the dark.


----------



## trshaner (Jun 26, 2015)

LR's PV2012 Tone controls work very well for recovering shadow and  highlight detail, but blown highlights at 100% are not recoverable. If  you *underexpose* a wide dynamic range subject so no highlights are blown in the raw image file it's possible to get an HDR effect with *just one file*.  Set LR's Highlights at -100, Shadows at +100, Exposure for good  midtones, Whites and Shadows just to clipping, and some Clarity to  brighten the image. You'll need to crank up the Luminance & Color  NR, but at small view sizes (Fit) the image may still look respectable.  Zoom to 1:1 and it's a different story–You'll never get noise free  shadows with these settings using a single image file.

Here's an  HDR made with a Canon 5D MKII using six 1EV bracketed images shot at ISO  100, and a one using the single -2EV bracketed image file of the same  set.


----------



## mikecox (Jun 26, 2015)

trshaner said:


> It's possible to get an HDR effect with *just one file*.  Set LR's Highlights at -100, Shadows at +100, Exposure for good  midtones, Whites and Shadows just to clipping, and some Clarity to  brighten the image. You'll need to crank up the Luminance & Color  NR, but at small view sizes (Fit) the image may still look respectable.  Zoom to 1:1 and it's a different story–You'll never get noise free  shadows with these settings using a single image file.


This is encouraging, I'll try this, thanks


----------

