helloiamrory,
You didnt mention how large your iso- and shutter-steps were.

I get perfect results with steps not lager then 2/3 eV or max. maybe 1 eV. In difficult light situations, for example when heading directly into the sun I use 1/3 eV - steps.

That way the jumps are totally invisible after exposure correction only, even if there are heavily overexposed areas. More work on the computer for better results.

Best regards

helloiamrory,
You didnt mention how large your iso- and shutter-steps were.

I get perfect results with steps not lager then 2/3 eV or max. maybe 1 eV. In difficult light situations, for example when heading directly into the sun I use 1/3 eV - steps.

That way the jumps are totally invisible after exposure correction only, even if there are heavily overexposed areas. More work on the computer for better results.

Best regards

Hey keksi, I used 1 stop for each exposure jump. Smaller ones may work as you said when shooting directly at the sunset. Thanks!

Hi Rory, could you please not quote the whole article when you are answering, just delete the quote if you don't need it. Thank you!

Hi Rory, could you please not quote the whole article when you are answering, just delete the quote if you don't need it. Thank you!

Sorry my bad. It happens when replying to the last post.

Tried this again the other day using 2.3 and smaller 1/3 stop exposure changes and the changes are still noticeable.. damn

Rory, I think you've ran into the crux of the limitation of LRT's approach to HG: the fact that matching images shot at different exposures often takes much more than an exposure slider adjustment. I have also found that while the approach could work if the scene dynamic range is limited, for scenes where the highlight at near the camera DR limit, it is extremely difficult to exactly match images shot at different exposures.

To circumvent this you should rather underexpose a bit when shooting to prevent blow highlights.