Photomatix

Hi All,
For those of you that routinely sell your nature images, is there room among your post processing tools for Photomatix? Is Photomatix used and accepted as a post processing application? I have seen some nice images really benefit when ran through a conservative post processing through Photomatix. Just curious...before I spend the money on this app, I'd like to get opinions on it.

Not so much for nature photos, but I use Photomatix for automotive photography (example here). If used judiciously - to tame high contrast for example - I very much think it has it's place in nature photography too.

Really cool image, thanks, Jim! While I have seen some nicely over-processed images, I have also seen some not-so-nicely over-processed images. I'm probably going to be on the more conservative side when it comes to HDR.
Thanks!

I'm with Jim on that. I've got Photomatix and I've got the Nik HDR software as well. With nature photography it is tough to get everything in the image still enough to allow for the HDR software to work without significant ghosting of leaves, limbs, etc. So, I use hand-blending on shots that need HDR and masks to brighten/darken as needed in selected areas.

I've taken a few interior shots of things like lighthouses. In those instances, HDR software can be fabulous if used judiciously. Click here & then click on the black & white photo in the middle of the top row. This is Corolla Light on the outer banks of NC - it's a 7 shot blend using Photomatix. Obviously nothing was moving between frames on that one.

Love that shot, Wick!

I use Photomatix very judiciously and with a light hand. This is a three image blend done in Photomatix with Exposure Fusion rather than Tone Mapping. I like it a lot but it doesn't work for every image blend. Since I don't know how to do manual blends I rely on this program exclusively for my bracketed shots. I have not regretted my purchase.

Great photo with very nice processing!

Woah!!!! Pam!!! This is awesome! Even better than the B&W version!

@Marie: I use Photomatix for nature images fairly often. You have to be careful though to not get that "HDR" look. Use "Exposure Fusion" with H&S adjust for the most realistic results.

Having said that, I'm finding more and more that the 5D Mark II has enough dynamic range that I don't even need HDR! On the rare occasions that I do, much of the time hand blending works better than Photomatix because of things moving inbetween frames (branches, leaves, clouds, grass, etc.).

Guess I see this from a totally different prospective. Your asking if the tool (in this case Photomatix) is accepted as a post processing application? First of all, accepted by whom? Let me see, is a 4 inch standard paint brush accepted as a painting tool for an artist or do all their brushes need to be small "artists" brushes? More importance should always be put on the final result of what one is trying to accomplish, not the means of getting there. Besides who knows how anyone processes their image, unless you tell them. If you base your work on how others think you should do it, your doomed from the beginning.

Agree with Brad 100%.

Brad's remarks are right on the money, in my opinion.

--P

Brad, I don't disagree with you, but I certainly wouldn't process my professional wedding photography images using picnik either. So I would not consider that a professional tool. That's kind of the point I was trying to relay, but apparently did not do that great a job. The more I get great advice and helpful suggestions (even if its something I might not have expected), that just gives me more opportunity to learn. I did, however, wanted to thank everyone who posted such great information, and appreciate everyone's point of view. You all are the best! Thank you!!!

I agree that the Photomatix tool is a great one if applied judiciously. I have seen some way over done images that just look fake. If used properly the dynamic range you saw in life can be reproduced in print or on screen. I have found that after running an image through the software I still take it to PhotoShop and tweak it more to obtain a good balanced appearance. Here is my example Shot at Machu Picchu Peru last June. It was just as the Sun peaked over the Andes mountain tops. There was no way to get sky detail, mntain detaila nd ruin detail all exposed well without using HDR. It is also a -2 - +2 5 exposure image.

Hi Marie,

Photomatix has always been a serious tool, used obviously to bring a super wide range of light within the narrow range of output whether it be print or screen. You either use an ND Grad filter to cut down the sky's brightness or you shoot multiple exposures and smoosh them together with SOMETHING. Photoshop's HDR tool is not as user friendly, Photomatix is easier IMO. But somewhere along the line somebody started doing the silver-washed mega-surreal look with halos you could measure with a wood ruler, and for some reason this became a fad, fortunately a short-lived one, kinda sorta. So Photomatix got a bad rap for that, despite it being a powerful tool in the photographer's toolbox. Photoshop gets the same bad rap because Rachel Ray shows up 60 pounds lighter on the cover of Good Housekeeping. Amazing how the software takes the blame, and not how a person uses it, lol.

Anyway, for nature work, I'd add it to your tool chest in a heartbeat.

Thanks Ed and Paul! Really appreciate your imput!
Ed, your image is just stunning!