Focus stacking for landscapes - question (Page 2): That sounds like a great technique. Worth remembering under the right conditions. Thanks...

repleo Loc: Boston

TheDman wrote:

This one is a 3-shot focus stack, ISO 100 on the mountains and lake and I think 800 or 1000 on the flowers, each different exposures, apertures, etc. Just make sure when you're piecing them together that the edges blend.

That sounds like a great technique. Worth remembering under the right conditions.
Thanks

LoneRangeFinder Loc: Left field

photodoc16 wrote:

Hello again,Technohogs, br I have been reading and... (show quote)

Manual mode. Do not change the exposure on a simple landscape stack.

Brent Rowlett Loc: Atlanta, GA

Why would anybody change the aperture with images taken for stacking—absolutely not. You want everything to be as even as possible before aligning the different focal length images. The result should be perfect focus front to rear or use a tilt and shift lens.

Feiertag Loc: British Columbia, Canada

Lovely work.

I have not tried focus stacking to date. I have a silly question regarding this procedure? If one takes ten shots with each being, lets say 20 mbps, is final stacked photo, 200 mbps?

Harold

TheDman Loc: USA

Brent Rowlett wrote:

Why would anybody change the aperture with images taken for stacking—absolutely not.

Because you want to stop motion and need a higher shutter speed. You're stacking for focus anyway, not exposure, so each different frame is already going to have different parts of the scene out of focus by definition.

TheDman Loc: USA

Feiertag wrote:

Lovely work.

I have not tried focus stacking to date. I have a silly question regarding this procedure? If one takes ten shots with each being, lets say 20 mbps, is final stacked photo, 200 mbps?

Harold

No, it will be the same pixel dimensions as one single frame. You're just using different parts of each image to form a single image.

Feiertag Loc: British Columbia, Canada

TheDman wrote:

No, it will be the same pixel dimensions as one single frame. You're just using different parts of each image to form a single image.

Thank you for the comment.

Brent Rowlett Loc: Atlanta, GA

Feiertag wrote:

Lovely work.

I have not tried focus stacking to date. I have a silly question regarding this procedure? If one takes ten shots with each being, lets say 20 mbps, is final stacked photo, 200 mbps?

Harold

No. The original photo size is preserved. I shoot jewelry. With macro work 1/16 of an inch in focal length makes a big difference. I shoot 10 images focusing on the stone to the rear of the shank. The software masks out everything that is out of focus with each image on a layer. Then you combine the parts of the image in focus for a total image in perfect focus-front to rear.

photodoc16

Brent,
Agreed - misses the whole point of focus stacking. Never suggested changing f stop. Most likely a SS issue with or without ISO adjustment. I guess the point is to have all images at a similar exposure but in a high dynamic range situation might not this be a problem? Better to use stacking in a low contrast situation usually without much or any sky.
Thanks,
Photodoc16

TheDman Loc: USA

photodoc16 wrote:

Brent,
Agreed - misses the whole point of focus stacking. Never suggested changing f stop. Most likely a SS issue with or without ISO adjustment. I guess the point is to have all images at a similar exposure but in a high dynamic range situation might not this be a problem? Better to use stacking in a low contrast situation usually without much or any sky.
Thanks,
Photodoc16

You can do both at the same time - focus and exposure blend. Why not take the best exposure of whatever you're focusing on?

photodoc16

Dman,
Yes, why not both. In high dynamic range situations just do HDR's and focus stacking together - same # of HDR's as Focus points.
Some here are using it and it might be more work than I anticipate but if the scene is that good, why not?
Thanks,
Photodoc16

gvarner Loc: Central Oregon Coast

Learn how to use hyperfocal distance. It's your friend.

photodoc16

GVarner,
Good point. However, given the interest in focus stacking there must be a problem with it. I have been relatively happy with the field of view with hyperfocal point guidance. My feeling has been that the sharp focus I have seen front to back with stacking is more impressive than I usually see with hyperfocal use or any other kind of focusing (1/3rd up from the bottom, etc.) So...I will give it a shot and see for myself. Have you tried it?
Thanks,
Photodoc16

TheDman Loc: USA

gvarner wrote:

Learn how to use hyperfocal distance. It's your friend.

That provides "acceptably sharp" DOF, but acceptable isn't acceptable to me. I want perfect, especially when printing large.

jackm1943 Loc: Omaha, Nebraska

Feiertag wrote:

Lovely work.

I have not tried focus stacking to date. I have a silly question regarding this procedure? If one takes ten shots with each being, lets say 20 mbps, is final stacked photo, 200 mbps?

Harold

No, at least with Zerene. The final file size will be the same whether you stack two images or 200 images. It will vary tho with the size of the individual images, the larger the pixel size the larger the final image.