Focus stacking (Page 3): Nice comparison

PierreD

Blenheim Orange wrote:

Here is the direct comparison you asked for. I hop... (show quote)

Nice comparison - thanks for posting!

cactuspic Loc: Dallas, TX

pithydoug wrote:

Posting thumbnails makes it hard to appreciate the difference.

I am reposting the images as full size jpgs so you can compare. The first is a focus stack taken at f/8 and the second is a single shot stopped down to f/32. For a comparison of the resolution at the point of focus of the f/32 shot, I have cropped to include only the center of the flower from the front right of the image. The crops of the flower center, being a very small portion of the original image, are also posted at full resolution.

(Download)

Rich1939 Loc: Pike County Penna.

Capn_Dave wrote:

You can also stack photos to get the silky water effect when you forget your ND filters and it
is the middle of the day. Set your camera on a tripod, compose your photo and fire about 10 shots.
Stack them in post and viola the silky water effect.

That is just begging to be tried. THANK YOU!

dwermske

Focus stacking is a powerful technique for extending a photo's apparent depth of field. It's perhaps most useful in close-up and macro photography, since the camera lens's highest f-stop is often insufficient to render everything in focus. It can even overcome the otherwise unavoidable sharpness loss from diffraction. When a photographer requires more depth of field, they typically just increase the f-stop setting of their camera lens. While this is a simple and effective technique, choosing a higher f-stop also has its disadvantages. It increases the necessary exposure time, and in extreme cases, it can also reduce image sharpness due to diffraction. Furthermore, one might desire a greater depth of field than a particular lens's maximum f-stop is able to provide. What's the solution? To combine several separate images (aka "image stacking"). This avoids many of the disadvantages of using too high an f-stop, while also retaining the advantage of a large depth of field. Specific example scenarios may include: Landscape photography, Macro photography and Low-light photography. Others have already privided excellent examples.

Real Nikon Lover Loc: Simi Valley, CA

Vietnam Vet wrote:

I have never done focus stacking because I don't see how that would be different than just taking a single image at like an f32. Will someone please take two images and post them? One a single image like a f32 and another using focus stacking. Convince me to give focus stacking a try.

----------------------------------------------------------

First off...thank you for your service!

Since this isn't the induction center, I hope I won't have to recruit you too hard to try focus stacking! :)

Posting a single photo and 10 stacked photos. The composition is junk... it was just something I had available to compare for you.

Photo 1 single photo: D850 Nikkor 24-70 zoom @24mm, f/2.8 1/200 sec, ISO 1600, room light.

Photo 2 10 photos: Same camera and lens. @24mm, F/9, 1.6 sec, ISO-64, room light

PP with Helicon Lite, NX2, PSE, ON and Perfectly Clear (both photos)

Give it a try. Good Luck!

Jim

(Download)

Blenheim Orange Loc: Michigan

cactuspic wrote:

I am reposting the images as full size jpgs so you can compare. The first is a focus stack taken at f/8 and the second is a single shot stopped down to f/32. For a comparison of the resolution at the point of focus of the f/32 shot, I have cropped to include only the center of the flower from the front right of the image. The crops of the flower center, being a very small portion of the original image, are also posted at full resolution.

Good examples.

Are you still using the lens from the Minolta scanner?

Mike

bwana Loc: Bergen, Alberta, Canada

Vietnam Vet wrote:

I have never done focus stacking because I don't see how that would be different than just taking a single image at like an f32. Will someone please take two images and post them? One a single image like a f32 and another using focus stacking. Convince me to give focus stacking a try.

F/32 might involve a very long exposure!? I'd prefer faster shots, progressive focus points and focus stacking/merge software such as that in Affinity Photo or Zerene stacker.

bwa

cactuspic Loc: Dallas, TX

Blenheim Orange wrote:

Good examples.

Are you still using the lens from the Minolta scanner?

Mike

Definitely, Mike. It is my go to lens for magnifications in the range of 1x to 3x. Wonderfully sharp with almost no chromatic aberrations. I am amazed that such a tiny lens performs so well.

Irwin

Vietnam Vet

Blenheim Orange wrote:

Here is the direct comparison you asked for. I hop... (show quote)

Thank you

Vietnam Vet

Jim Eads wrote:

--------------------------------------------------... (show quote)

Thank you

Rich1939 Loc: Pike County Penna.

For what it's worth; In an experiment I recently stacked 5 images using Photoshop and it did a great job. The lens I used,"focus breathed" so each image was slightly different in size. And, I used auto ISO so each image was also slightly different in exposure. Photoshop handled both problems without batting an eye.

SteveR Loc: Michigan

tdekany wrote:

I would only suggest focus stacking if you want the best sharpness. At f32 it will not be as sharp.

Get a 500mm f4 and shoot from about 25'.

John Gerlach Loc: Island Park, Idaho

I have an article with illustrations on my blog about focus stacking. Toward the bottom is a comparison between a flower at f/8 and stacked and the same composition at f/22. The stacked version is much sharper. Stacking is a powerful tool for both macro and landscape photography. I have been using it for about a decade with excellent results. Stacks are simple to shoot and simple to process. Time to embrace it!

https://www.gerlachnaturephoto.com/single-post/2018/02/23/Focus-Stacking-the-Easy-and-Successful-Way

mmcgavin

rwilson1942 wrote:

According to an online calculator, the DoF of a 100mm lens focused at 400mm at f32 would be ~2.6mm.
I did a focus stack of a 2 inch diameter rose a few days ago, shooting 49 'slices' to get the entire rose in focus.
You will likely also get diffraction at f32.
Most experts on macro photography recommend not using apertures smaller than f16.

It is worth remembering that as Magnification or Ratio of Reproduction approaches life size i.e. R.R,=1:1, the aperture marked on the lens -the NOMINAL aperture is no longer the same aperture but effectively becomes a smaller aperture and this aperture is the EFFECTIVE aperture. Thus at F-16 and RR=1:1, this nominal aperture of F-16 becomes an Effective aperture of F-32 which can cause diffraction.

Blenheim Orange Loc: Michigan

John Gerlach wrote:

I have an article with illustrations on my blog ab... (show quote)

Your description of stacking is really good.

This post is good too:

https://www.gerlachnaturephoto.com/single-post/2018/08/06/Processing-Focus-Stacks

Lots of beautiful images at your site.

Mike