HDRI - making them etc.

[Cesar R]

I have for the longest time (years) been wanting to make my own HDRIs. However never really followed through.

however now, that I am getting back into 3dsmax like back in 2001 (hehe) I think its a good time to try it out.

 

I have been several websites that sell the ones made with a "chrome" sphere, and then I see several website that sell unwrapped? spherical HDRIs. I understand the process of making the mirror ball HDRI, however does it yield the same results and the unwrapped images?

 

I was reading on the web and came across a video where it was suggested that those unwrapped images where shot with a mirror ball and then post processed. Then I have also read that a wide angle lens and some (or lots) of stitching is another way to created them.

 

What I ultimately would like to know is, which of the two methods yields the best results?

and if the mirror ball image NEEDS to be unwrapped to be usable and again provide good lighting?

 

Thanks !

[matthewspencer]

All the HDRI formats function the same. It's all just different ways of "unwrapping" the same image. Even some of those "mirror probe" images weren't actually taken using a chrome ball; they might just be wrapped that way.

 

It comes down to two things:

1. Ease of looking at an HDRI and knowing what's in it

2. Compatibility with your renderer

 

Many renderers won't work with light probes, nor crosses, but all will definitely work with the rectangular format. Another benefit of the rectangular format is that if you're browsing in Bridge or something, you can vaguely tell what the content of the image is, and sort of see what you're doing if you're editing it in Photoshop.

 

If you're taking images yourself, the mirror ball is a good idea. But you can easily do it with regular photo stitching. It would require a lot of shots (3 exposures of every shot) to get a full 360 degrees.

[laszloadrian]

Read Christian Bloch book. Is everything you need to know written from a cg artist perspective.

 

http://www.hdri-handbook.com/book/index.html

[Francisco Penaloza]

Basically it depend what you will use the image for, if you want to create a HDRI only to illuminate your image, a Chrome ball workflow will work great, if you want to use your HDRI as backdrop, you'll will rather take those pictures with a pano head, fish eye lens combo or a very wide angle lens.

The difference, is clarity of the image, no matter how mirror perfect your ball it is, still is reflecting your image whereas the fish eye lens is capturing your image straight to your camera.

Now why chrome ball is used to created HDRI, because is cheaper than pano systems and if you are taking several brackets of a image, is faster and the chances that your camera move are less than the ones in a pano head environment.

Now there is some software that help you to do this more easy in your camera, but still the problem is there.

HDRI-handbook is a great resource for this type or work.

[Cesar R]

Thank you for the information guys. I will make sure to read some more and come back if I have more questions.

[bindunarayan]

HDRI handbook is a great resource, and one can learn right from the basics of HDRI if they opt to read this book online.

[frederiktennholt]

Hello, I shoot HDR's using a NodalNinja Panohead and PTGui software to stitch my HDR panos. Works great. I use a Canon EOS 60D and a Samyang 8mm Fisheye lens, which is cheaper than the Canon Fisheye, but still very good quality. For the Canon I use the free MagicLantern software (on the memory card), which allows the camera to shoot HDR brackets up to 9 exposures in one single click. It's really sweet.