Photomatix Pro 5 vs Aurora HDR 2017 | Which is best for you?


This article was updated in December 2017 using Photomatix Pro 6 and Aurora HDR 2018. Read it here!

Recently I came across an article I wrote in early 2015 comparing Photomatix Pro, Nik HDR Efex Pro and Lightroom’s HDR Merge. It is a good article with a lot of useful information, but a mere 18 months later it borders on obsolete.

Nik, now owned by Google, is antiquated by technology standards. While the software still works (and is absolutely FREE), updates or upgrades are unlikely. Lightroom’s HDR Merge also hasn’t changed much since it was introduced. It is a useful addition to Lightroom, but I find that software built specifically for HDR does a superior job.

Today I’m comparing Photomatix Pro 5 vs Aurora HDR 2017 – arguably the best and most popular HDR tools currently on the market. If you’d like more information on Lightroom’s HDR Merge or Nik HDR Efex Pro, take a look at the article from 2015.

Photomatix Pro 5 vs Auoroa HDR 2017

I’ve been a fan of HDR photography for a long time.

Until last year, Photomatix Pro was my go-to software for tone mapping (merging multiple exposures into a single image). Then Aurora HDR arrived and put a new spin on my HDR workflow.

While each of these HDR tools have similar goals (i.e. merging multiple exposures), the way I, as a photographer and artist approach each of them is very different. For instance, I use Photomatix Pro primarily to merge my bracketed images. Stylistic edits are then made in other software such as LightroomTopaz Adjust or Macphun’s Intensify.

Conversely, Aurora HDR is designed to be a one-stop-shop for both tone mapping (merging bracketed images) AND creating stylistic effects. There are a few things that Aurora HDR can’t do – such as cloning out distractions or cropping – but those can be done later in Lightroom or Photoshop.

The significant differences in how each piece of software is used make it difficult to compare them side-by-side. However, with my personal style, the final image from both methods is quite similar. Both programs do a great job, leading me to the conclusion that the best HDR software is the one that best fits your unique workflow.

Test Image: The Coleman Bridge

Original Bracketed Photos | Photomatix Pro vs Aurora HDR 2017

This bracketed series (f/7.1, ISO 100; EV-1.3, EV 0, EV+1.3) was captured handheld below the Coleman Bridge on the York River in Virginia.

Default Tone Mapping

First – lets take a look at the default results for each program.

Aurora HDR 2017

  • Lightroom >> Export >> Aurora HDR 2017 >> Open Original Images
  • Alignment – checked
  • Additional Settings >> Color Denoise – On >> Chromatic Aberration Removal – On
Aurora HDR 2017 with Default Settings

Aurora HDR 2017 with Default Settings

The photograph above from Aurora HDR 2017 (default settings) is underexposed and oversaturated.

Photomatix Pro

  • Lightroom >> Export >> Photomatix Pro
  • Align Images – checked, Crop aligned result – checked
  • Preset – Handheld (Standard)
  • Reduce Noise – Checked (All Source Images)
  • Reduce Chromatic Aberrations
  • Output Format TIFF 16-bit
  • Tone Mapping – Details Enhancer – Method Defaults
Photomatix Pro with Default Settings

Photomatix Pro with Default Settings

The photo above from Photomatix Pro (default settings) has more detail in the shadows and more realistic color. However, note the color of the sky through the metalwork of the bridge toward the center of the photo – it doesn’t match the sky in the rest of the photograph.

My HDR Workflow

Aurora HDR 2017

Final Image Processed with Aurora HDR 2017 & Lightroom

Final Image Processed with Aurora HDR 2017 & Lightroom

In Aurora:

  • Layer 1 – Default Tone Mapped Image
  • Layer 2 – Create Luminosity Mask of highlight areas – locally darken highlights to reduce clipping
  • Layer 3 – Globally Open Shadows, Further reduce Highlights; Desaturate Blue, Yellow, & Red in the HSL Panel
  • Layer 4 – Create Luminosity Mask of shadows (bridge), Increase Clarity, Structure, & Vibrance

In Lightroom:

  • Apply Lens Correction/Reduce Chromatic Aberration
  • Auto set White & Black Points (Hold shift key while double clicking on the words Whites & Blacks)
  • Add Clarity (+25)
  • Add subtle Vignette (-11)
  • Use Spot Removal Tool to remove two small artifacts in clouds
  • Add Sharpening (+81, Masking +70)

Photomatix Pro

Final Image Processed with Photomatix Pro & Lightroom

Final Image Processed with Photomatix Pro & Lightroom

In Photomatix:

  • Increase Strength (+80)
  • Decrease White Point & Increase Black Point while watching histogram to minimize clipping highlights and shadows
  • Increase Gamma (midtones)

In Lightroom:

  • Remove Chromatic Aberrations
  • Adjust White Balance (slightly warmer)
  • Auto set White & Black Points (Hold shift key while double clicking on the words Whites & Blacks)
  • Increase Clarity (+50)
  • Increase Vibrance (+27)
  • Locally adjust water – Decrease Clarity and Increase Vibrance
  • Sharpen (+82, Masking +64)
  • Add Subtle Vignette (-11)

Photomatix Pro 5 vs Aurora HDR 2017 Workflow Comparison

I spent far more time making stylistic adjustments in Aurora HDR 2017 than with Photomatix Pro 5. Conversely, I made more stylistic adjustments in Lightroom on the photo processed in Photomatix Pr0 5. In the end, the photos are nearly identical. There are subtle differences in color and detail, but my overall style came through with both tools.

Feature Comparison

 Aurora HDR 2017Photomatix Pro 5
System CompatibilityMac Only (PC Version in Developement)Mac & PC
RAW SupportYesNo
Plug-in CapabilityYesYes
Standalone CapabilityYesYes
Batch ProcessingYesYes
Free TrialYesYes
Money Back GuaranteeYesYes
Military DiscountYes (Click Here for Info)No
Education DiscountYes (Click Here for Info)Yes (Click Here for Info)
Discount for my readersUse coupon code “angandrieux” for $10 offUse coupon code “angandrieux” for 15% off
Retail Price$99$99

Photomatix Pro 5 vs Aurora HDR 2017 | Which is best?

As you can see from the feature list above, both HDR tools have very similar features. The deciding factor is you and your personal workflow (unless you use a PC, then Photomatix is the obvious choice). I urge you to try both tools (they both offer free trials) and see which one is a better fit for your workflow.

My choice?

While I won’t be getting rid of Photomatix Pro 5 anytime soon, my personal favorite is Aurora HDR 2017. I love having the stylistic options at my fingertips and the ability to work locally and with layers without leaving the program. I also prefer Aurora’s user interface. The layout and slider descriptions are more intuitive to me, all of which make my HDR workflow more efficient.

Try Aurora HDR 2017 for FREE

Try Photomatix Pro 5 for FREE


Disclosure: This post contains affiliate links which means that I may receive a commission if you click on one of the product links and make a purchase. I only share products that I believe will be valuable to my readers. All opinions are my own.







Disclosure: One of the ways I support this website is by partnering with awesome companies, whose products I use and love. These partnerships allow me to earn a small commission when you make a purchase through one of my affiliate links, but there is no additional cost for you. Thank you for your support!


  1. […] Photomatix Pro vs Aurora HDR 2017 | Which is best for you? […]

  2. Virginia Lincoln on October 30, 2017 at 5:36 pm

    I downloaded Aurora and it was terrific – until they sent me an update. Now the program freezes when I try to save the photo and it often crashes my entire computer. I do not know what that update did, but it ruined the program. I have demanded a refund even though I prefer it to Photomatix as it does not support RAW photos. I just cannot risk it ruining my computer.

    • Angela Andrieux on October 31, 2017 at 9:54 am

      Hi Virginia – I’m sorry to hear that you’ve been having issues with Aurora HDR! Which version are you using? Mac or PC? v.2018? If you haven’t already, please send an email to and their awesome tech team will help you sort out the issue. They can also help with the refund if that is what you desire.

      As for Photomatix Pro – it does support RAW photos, you just have to load them directly instead of through a plugin. However, although they have RAW support I recommend using Lightroom (or another RAW converter of your choice) and then exporting the TIFFs to Photomatix. Not all RAW converters are created equally and in my opinion Adobe does a better job with RAW conversion.

    • Paulo Oliveira on December 5, 2017 at 5:43 am

      Give a try to I used photomatix for years , and in my humble opinon easyHDR tops it in every way. Haven´t tried Aurora yet

      • Angela Andrieux on December 5, 2017 at 11:23 am

        Hi Paulo – I’ll have to try easyHDR. I’d also be interested in your thoughts on Aurora when/if you try it out. :)

Leave a Comment