Comparing 32bit HDR vs Standard Enhancer

Comparing 32bit HDR vs Standard Enhancer, a photo by Fragga on Flickr.

Via Flickr:
Picture taken inside a working windmill

Top left: Standard Photomatix Enhancer HDR
Top right: 32bit HDR created by Photomatix
Bottom left: zero exposure RAW
Bottom right: Split between 32bit HDR and the Standard Enhancer

No pictures have been edited in any serious way. The white balance is the same on all.

The standard enhancer method shows the dirty look long associated with HDR. The algorithm tries to equal out the picture and so doing makes the image look quite flat, lacking contrast. It gains more details in the deep shadows, but that is what's causing the overall flat look. At the pixel level the standard HDR lacks sharpness and the colours are not true to the scene. The colours of the 32bit HDR are what I saw with my eyes, albeit slightly on the warm side, but I think my canon always creates warm pictures.

Having said that I think the standard HDR creates a certain style which can look quite effective for some images. With the standard HDR you would take that "base" image you've created then bring into Photoshop the 3 component images and using a soft brush blend back some of the bits you like better from the originals. For example, the white walls on the standard HDR are dirty, the image underneath (the zero source file) has better walls. Trey Ratcliff (stuckincustoms) works in this fashion and produces wonderful images.

It could be said one method creates a more stylized finish and one a more realistic finish, but either method still requires further editing.