drdale

I am using Photoshop CS4. Are there better ones around?

JimH123 Loc: Morgan Hill, CA

Here are two. There are more:

http://www.heliconsoft.com/ <-- I think most use this

http://zerenesystems.com/cms/stacker

martinfisherphoto Loc: Lake Placid Florida

As Suggested try the Macro forum here on the UHH, several of us stack. Some use PS while others use stacking software, I prefer Zerene myself.

drdale

I tried both approaches on the same picture. About 25 shots on a rail, and 5 shots using the focus ring. Very very little difference between them using PS cs4.

UtahBob Loc: Southern NJ

After reading through the replies and your comments, I think you need to download the trial of Helicon Focus and Helicon Remote and use them to figure out what your step size/aperture needs to be for the subject you are trying to capture. I've used CS5 to try and stack and Helicon/Zerene are much better by far. If you have a Nikon live view camera (can't speak on the Canon side) you can tether with remote and even control the stepping depending on the body/lens.

With regard to moving the camera verses changing focus ... done both ... same result and the software works either way if your step size, etc. is appropriate.

If you can post a few of the original shots for a stack that might tell us if you have too much distance.

UtahBob Loc: Southern NJ

That is an excellent suggestion. Fine thread screw moving a stage with a digital caliper. That will give me more range than the small deletion/starrett combo I use. Since the subjects are small, moving the subject (depending on the type) is always easier than moving the camera in my opinion. Another thing to build.

Apaflo Loc: Anchorage, Alaska

Except that done correctly moving the subject would have to also move the lighting. That isn't usually easy at all.

With either manual or motorized it seems to me that moving a camera is pretty much just as easy as moving a specimen holder, and keeping the camera stable while being moved may be easier than keeping a variety of different specimen options stable while they are moved.

But both ways work!

hpjb Loc: Eindhoven, Nederland

Both methodes works. I used them in te passed

Henry

oldtigger Loc: Roanoke Virginia-USA

except with totally diffused lighting, moving the subject confuses the stacker or leaves streaks in highlights.

Gene51 Loc: Yonkers, NY, now in LSD (LowerSlowerDelaware)

You can move the camera (preferable) or adjust the focus (should suffice). What lens are you using?

The reason I ask is that you might not be taking enough images. Let's say you have a flower that is 3 inches in depth. A 105 macro at 12 inches will have a depth of field of .07 inches at F8. This means that you will have to take 43 images (3/.07 = 42.86) to get your image in focus from front to back. Actually you will need to take more, allowing for slight overlap in focus for each shot.

If you are using the focus ring that will be pretty hard to get right. if you are using a rack and pinion focusing rail, you can advance the camera in .05" increments to get the shot.

Or you can use F11, which give a .1" depth of field.

Or you can move back, say to 18" in which case your DOF will be .18" and .13" at F8 and F11 respectively.

here are a couple of links for macro rails:

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/193311-REG/Velbon_SUPER_MAG_SLIDER_Super_Mag_Slider.html?gclid=Cj0KEQiA2o6lBRCn_b7yppe98rQBEiQAMpnYnW75IqGr_u_5BDhl1N9jEp3Z_j7vc7iMw08fNNSv-cwaAlXZ8P8HAQ

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1055225-REG/kirk_fr_2_focusing_rail.html

https://www.huntsphotoandvideo.com/detail_page.cfm?productid=PRO9440&mfg=Promaster&show=Yes

The ProMaster may be all you need - you can always add an Arca Swiss clamp to make it easier to use if you have Arca plates on your lenses and camera.

Bobbee

Agreed on this. You have to calc you DOF and the divide that into the distance you want to cover and the +/- 2-3 more shots, that is the total number you go for. Now I have used ControlMyNikon. a tethering software and it has Focus Stacking ability built in. It is nice. In went to PS and did the stack. I hear Xerene does a better job. I have that. Been too lazy to install.

jerryc41 Loc: Catskill Mts of NY

I've done a bit of this with CS6, so you're off to a good start. I didn't use rails, just manual.

cactuspic Loc: Dallas, TX

I do a substantial amount of stacking. A stack of 10 is a very thin stack. Most of my stacks tend to involve 50 or more images, some far more. I have a rule of thumb that I use to determine whether to advance focus by moving the lens on a rail or by turning the focusing ring. If the magnification is 1:1 or less, I find that turning the focus ring works better. At magnifications greater than 1:1, I advance focus by using a macro rail.

If your stacks are not sharp, the first two culprits to check for are: 1. insufficient images to get everything in sharp focus; or 2. camera movement. I would try to make you steps thinner using 2 to 4 steps for every step you presently use. See if that helps. Stackers are also strict about minimizing camera movement. At a minimum, they will lock their mirror up when stacking because the mirror slap of an slr causes movement that impacts the sharpness of the image. Most stackers I know use Canons or Nikons that have a live view mode where the shutter is opened before the shot and the sensor starts recording electronically, which eliminates the internal movement caused by the shutter opening. Electronic first curtain shutters are common in in Canon dslr's and have been included in some of the new Nikons. In short I would try smaller increments on my steps and I would minimize movement by using live view with electronic first curtain shutter. Also, I use a steady tripod and a remote trigger as additional steps to avoid camera movement.

I think you will find that stand alone programs like Zeren Stacker, do a far better job and are far easier to use than PS. I believe you can download a free trial copy at their website.

oldtigger Loc: Roanoke Virginia-USA

good advice

Dik

Focus stacking has its limitations.
For example: if you had a newspaper with a hole in it and tried to shoot a closeup of the paper with both the paper and the infinity scene through the hole in focus, there will always be a fuzzy ring around the hole.
The shot with the infinity scene in focus will have the part near the hole blocked by the fuzzy image of the paper hole edge.
This can be helped by using a smaller aperture, but not completely eliminated.