How do you shoot macro and stack photo's for focus?
Nov 11, 2014 09:15:35 #
Speters said: " Manual focus, (best to use magnified live view) and change your focus point from front to back in increments, or vice-verse and then stack the shots in Photoshop, or use a dedicated program. It's really pretty simple."
After I read the posts, it is obvious that the software world is well covered by all above pages. Speters used the difficult term, "Manual focus." Yikes!! necessary for stacking and stacking depends on good incremental focus.
Focus by increments can be a problem with that &%($$*% screen. If indoors doing a "table-top", then viewing by linking the camera to that 32" HDTV screen is a wonder. Outside, if you have WIFI, you can link to a tablet by tether or by WIFI. Putting a "black box" shield around the tablet will help.
Consider a 7" tablet is 5.4x the area of a 3" screen and the black-box shield aids. With a little work, you can set up a mounting rail attached to the bottom of the camera to make handling easy.. and if you are stacking you will be using a tripod.
After I read the posts, it is obvious that the software world is well covered by all above pages. Speters used the difficult term, "Manual focus." Yikes!! necessary for stacking and stacking depends on good incremental focus.
Focus by increments can be a problem with that &%($$*% screen. If indoors doing a "table-top", then viewing by linking the camera to that 32" HDTV screen is a wonder. Outside, if you have WIFI, you can link to a tablet by tether or by WIFI. Putting a "black box" shield around the tablet will help.
Consider a 7" tablet is 5.4x the area of a 3" screen and the black-box shield aids. With a little work, you can set up a mounting rail attached to the bottom of the camera to make handling easy.. and if you are stacking you will be using a tripod.
Nov 11, 2014 09:18:44 #
Harry Thomas
Loc: Doylestown, Pennsylvania
lighthouse wrote:
I have never stacked a true macro image so take my comments for what you think they are worth.
All the upper level stuff I have read, says that you do not adjust your focus, you should adjust your camera to subject distance instead.
A train of thought also echoed by the best macro photographer I have met. He uses a Canon MP-E 65mm for his up coming book on some tiny type of bugs he is studying.
All the upper level stuff I have read, says that you do not adjust your focus, you should adjust your camera to subject distance instead.
A train of thought also echoed by the best macro photographer I have met. He uses a Canon MP-E 65mm for his up coming book on some tiny type of bugs he is studying.
Not totally dedicated to stacking but a very effective and easy to use software package, Smart Photo Editor. Reasonably priced.
Nov 11, 2014 09:28:46 #
Mark7829
Loc: Calfornia
Greenguy33 wrote:
Can this be done in Lightroom?
No it can not be done in LR. In fact there are a lot of things that you can't do in LR that can be done in PS. Yet, people say all you need is LR - that is so wrong.
Nov 11, 2014 09:37:19 #
dpullum wrote:
Speters said: " Manual focus, (best to use ma... (show quote)
These were done with no rail, no tethered screen, manual focus, simple, easy - by necessity - these were taken at Longwood Gardens, in PA, and to linger with a long setup would have been rude and inconsiderate. I think I took each series in under a minute, including tripod setup, composition and capture. The first image I did using CS5 (I believe), and the second Helicon Focus.
Nov 11, 2014 09:42:40 #
Mark7829 wrote:
No it can not be done in LR. In fact there are a lot of things that you can't do in LR that can be done in PS. Yet, people say all you need is LR - that is so wrong.
IMHO, or IMNSHO, photographers who claim that LR is all that is needed, either are misinformed, no concept of what a properly finished print should look like and how that is different from the proof quality that comes out of LR, or just have a lower standard of quality. Did I mention lazy?
:)
I have yet to come across an image that could not be improved upon with a pass through a pixel editor (you can take your pick - I use several)
Nov 11, 2014 10:16:00 #
Gene51 wrote:
IMHO, or IMNSHO, photographers who claim that LR is all that is needed, either are misinformed, no concept of what a properly finished print should look like and how that is different from the proof quality that comes out of LR, or just have a lower standard of quality. Did I mention lazy?
:)
I have yet to come across an image that could not be improved upon with a pass through a pixel editor (you can take your pick - I use several)
:)
I have yet to come across an image that could not be improved upon with a pass through a pixel editor (you can take your pick - I use several)
Amen Gene! Couldn't have said it better myself!
Nov 11, 2014 10:19:26 #
Tom Brownell wrote:
Amen Gene! Couldn't have said it better myself!
:)
Nov 11, 2014 10:37:28 #
Gene51 wrote:
:)
Actually Gene, wasn't it you who had that absolutely stunning image of the moon? If it was, would you repost it here?
Nov 11, 2014 10:58:42 #
Tom Brownell wrote:
Actually Gene, wasn't it you who had that absolutely stunning image of the moon? If it was, would you repost it here?
Here ya go!
Nov 11, 2014 11:06:57 #
Gene51 wrote:
Here ya go!
That has to be the most stunning image of the moon that I've ever seen, bar none! Now that's what I call photography!!!
:thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup:
P.S. I hope you don't mind Gene, I saved this moon image to my desktop. I just had to! ;-)
Nov 11, 2014 11:49:10 #
Greenguy33 wrote:
What is involved in shooting macro's and shooting several shots with a different focal point and stacking the photo's?
It sounds like a very time consuming process. What kind of software program do you need?
It sounds like a very time consuming process. What kind of software program do you need?
I have personally used helicon and Zerene Stacker. I found that Zerene is by far the best of the two. Actually uses two different algorithems to process the collection of photos and YOU choose what looks best to you.
Highly recommended.
Hope this helps.
Pete
Nov 11, 2014 12:27:04 #
Nov 11, 2014 13:17:16 #
Tom Brownell wrote:
That has to be the most stunning image of the moon that I've ever seen, bar none! Now that's what I call photography!!!
:thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup:
P.S. I hope you don't mind Gene, I saved this moon image to my desktop. I just had to! ;-)
:thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup:
P.S. I hope you don't mind Gene, I saved this moon image to my desktop. I just had to! ;-)
:thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup:
Nov 11, 2014 13:27:39 #
Tom Brownell wrote:
That has to be the most stunning image of the moon that I've ever seen, bar none! Now that's what I call photography!!!
:thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup:
P.S. I hope you don't mind Gene, I saved this moon image to my desktop. I just had to! ;-)
:thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup:
P.S. I hope you don't mind Gene, I saved this moon image to my desktop. I just had to! ;-)
Just don't sell it to anyone - :)
Nov 11, 2014 13:34:31 #
It's been suggested before but if you want to see some OUTSTANDING stacks on insects and spiders, you should visit the macroforum. Though there are several members there who 'stack' VERY well, one of the best is fstop22.
Take a look at some of his work then heed his advice.
Take a look at some of his work then heed his advice.
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.