Views
183
Replies
3
Status
Closed
Chris Cox addressed the question of native HDRI support in PS last year, and I thought it might be time to revisit the question (prompted by my 3D app of choice now supporting HDRI natively 😉
Regarding PS’s lack of HDRI support, Chris said:
1) Lack of standards
A: The HDRI CD I just bought from Dosch contains HDRI files that can be used natively in Lightwave, Maya, Cinema4D, 3DS Max, Softimage, Strata 3D, etc. Perhaps I misunderstood your response, but this fact would suggest that there is some standardization afoot.
3) Lack of really good dynamic range mapping technology (each approach has drawbacks, somewhere).
A: Every feature has a drawback, inherently. But I’ll wager that there is no drawback as significant as a complete lack of support. (Okay, I guess shoddy support might hurt more than it helps, but Adobe wouldn’t release HDRI support before they "got it right" would they? Which is really what my question is about.)
4) HDR doesn’t fit with normal image processing (which is bound to a unit range).
A: Is "normal" not subjective? Seems natural that I would use PS for HDRI editing and creation, certainly, especially if I had access to the rest of the PS toolset. Or did you mean that it was still too "niche-y" to invest dev support into? As for a "unit range"… do you mean bits per channel? The fact that PS already has some support for 16 bit imagery would suggest that the need/desire already exists to step beyond 8 bits for some tasks.
5) Customers who don’t read what I just wrote.
A: Shirty! Okay, so I read what you wrote. The question, however, remains. Is there anything that you can tell us about the future of PS support for HDRI?
(We’ll ask again in 2005 😉
Regarding PS’s lack of HDRI support, Chris said:
1) Lack of standards
A: The HDRI CD I just bought from Dosch contains HDRI files that can be used natively in Lightwave, Maya, Cinema4D, 3DS Max, Softimage, Strata 3D, etc. Perhaps I misunderstood your response, but this fact would suggest that there is some standardization afoot.
3) Lack of really good dynamic range mapping technology (each approach has drawbacks, somewhere).
A: Every feature has a drawback, inherently. But I’ll wager that there is no drawback as significant as a complete lack of support. (Okay, I guess shoddy support might hurt more than it helps, but Adobe wouldn’t release HDRI support before they "got it right" would they? Which is really what my question is about.)
4) HDR doesn’t fit with normal image processing (which is bound to a unit range).
A: Is "normal" not subjective? Seems natural that I would use PS for HDRI editing and creation, certainly, especially if I had access to the rest of the PS toolset. Or did you mean that it was still too "niche-y" to invest dev support into? As for a "unit range"… do you mean bits per channel? The fact that PS already has some support for 16 bit imagery would suggest that the need/desire already exists to step beyond 8 bits for some tasks.
5) Customers who don’t read what I just wrote.
A: Shirty! Okay, so I read what you wrote. The question, however, remains. Is there anything that you can tell us about the future of PS support for HDRI?
(We’ll ask again in 2005 😉
MacBook Pro 16” Mockups 🔥
– in 4 materials (clay versions included)
– 12 scenes
– 48 MacBook Pro 16″ mockups
– 6000 x 4500 px
