focus/image stacking?

[CLINTOS]

Anyone doing this with their close up macro pic's


what program's are you using?
will photo shop 5 work?

is it possible with small frags against the glass a 50mm,extension tubes,dslr,steady tripod?

Do I need a macro rail?

Any links?

 

[Recty]

I focus stacked a spider using CS5 and a macro lens on my 5D mkII. I didn't have macro rails but I really wished I would have.

The same thing would easily be possible with corals, in fact much easier because they arent a moving target.

You dont really need a super steady tripod, any hokey one will do as I handheld mine and CS5 is just smart enough when combining the images to line them all up correctly. I was pretty close to perfect but CS5 made it perfect

Here are two sample images from before stacking...

And here is the final image after 5 images were stacked and processed...

 

[CLINTOS]

It's good to hear that photoshop has stacking.


stacking does make a difference indeed, nice photo.

I seen that image while trying to find info on stacking/reef aquarium etc on google.

Here's a few link's that got me thinking about stacking:

http://www.heliconsoft.com/video.html
check out the first video

is photoshop 5 as good? can you stack like 30 photo's if you wanted to into 1?

I'm new to photography and photoshop and just wanted to know, because I am going to focus on just a few close up's of yuma's for now, with different shutter speeds and aperture, then was hoping to get into a little stacking.

another 2:
http://www.dgrin.com/showthread.php?t=61316

http://tinylanscapes.wordpress.com/2011/07/28/focus-stacking-helicon-focus/

 

[CLINTOS]

Is it possible to use raw in focus stacking or just jpeg?

With such beautiful pic's on R.C, I would expect a few rebel's to spill their secret's.

 

[Recty]

Yes, if you're asking if Photoshop CS5 is good, it is. You can stack any number of images. I think the most I've stacked is 9. You basically go in and select Automate and then I cant remember the next command, but it's something about merging the photographs. Then you select all the files you want and hit OK and after it churns away at it, you'll have a stacked photo.

You can use RAW with stacking, for sure. It's all I've ever done actually.

 

[Mike_Noren]

A cheaper (and very good) alternative is Helicon Focus. There's also some useful free utilities at that site.

 

[Hookup]

i wish, wish they'd make a plug-in for lightroom that would do this... and photo-stitching and HDR... those are three pretty common techniques that should be standard, or at least a $49 add-in kit would be ok...

i also wish i had 60million dollars...

 

[SUMMERS]

If you are shooting with a Canon, I strongly recommend using Magic Lantern. It has Focus stacking option built into the settings.

 

[CLINTOS]

Yes, if you're asking if Photoshop CS5 is good, it is. You can stack any number of images. I think the most I've stacked is 9. You basically go in and select Automate and then I cant remember the next command, but it's something about merging the photographs. Then you select all the files you want and hit OK and after it churns away at it, you'll have a stacked photo.

You can use RAW with stacking, for sure. It's all I've ever done actually.

Thanks I'm going to give it shot in raw with photoshop5

Do you know if white balance can be adjusted with the final image? or is this something that needs to be done with all images, prior to stacking?

 

[CLINTOS]

Was watching a few video tutorial's and they mentioned that if you use a wide aperture that it will take more photo's and less photo's with a mid range aperture.

Would the final photo result have more depth of field if I were to take say 20 shots @ F1.8 instead of around 4 shot's @ f 8?

 

[Mike_Noren]

Would the final photo result have more depth of field if I were to take say 20 shots @ F1.8 instead of around 4 shot's @ f 8?

The software detects the parts of the photos which are in focus and merges them; if you have sufficient photos that every part of the object is in focus in at least one photo, then the entire object will be in focus in the finished image. Using a smaller aperture simply means that you don't have to merge as many photos to achieve that effect.

 

[CLINTOS]

Thanks for the explanation.

I'm using this tutorial to give it a shot:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0U2KU6gXlZA

Seems pretty straight forward.

 

[Recty]

Thanks I'm going to give it shot in raw with photoshop5

Do you know if white balance can be adjusted with the final image? or is this something that needs to be done with all images, prior to stacking?

You can adjust white balance in a jpeg in CS5 but it's nothing like adjusting white balance on a RAW image.

I'm actually pretty sure when I did my photo stacking, I did all my adjusting, converted the images to jpeg and saved them to a folder, then had Photoshop process them into a stacked image. You can still tweak it afterwards how you want but the outcome of the stacking wont be a RAW file, it will be a large .psd file I think, or else a .tif.

 

[CLINTOS]

I used the raw file and it ended up being like you said a psd, had a hard time trying to convert it to jpeg.

was as simple as pressing save as and renaming the psd to jpeg

here's the trial stacking of 9 images taken with a 50mm len's/12mm extension tube, canon eos t3

f/11, 1.3 shutter,awb

does it look like the stack worked?

 

[CLINTOS]

I'm hoping that was stacked.

If not oh well, I'll never know.

Thanks.

off to a professional forum.

 

[Mike_Noren]

We can't tell if the stacking "worked", because we don't know what the source images looked like. The point of stacking is getting a larger depth-of-field than you can get with a single photo at minimum aperture (the higher the magnification the smaller the depth of field; if you shoot through a stereo microscope which typically magnifies 10-100x, the depth of field is often less than one millimeter), so you take a series of photos where you gradually shift focus, and combine them into a single photo where everything is in focus.

Here's a technical discussion with examples.