Nope. I will not use a photo without crediting photographer. Even in "public domain" a photographer's name should be available.

Is this your photograph? Will you allow it to be used in an article about digging wells?

I apologize for the rude tone to you in an earlier post on your thread. The poster is NOT a macro-photographer, and has NEVER previously posted on this forum. I have removed his post, and ask you to ignore his flippant answer to you.

Per OP's request, this thread has been locked due to multiple and repeated hijacking posts about 3-D imaging, most of which have been deleted, but a few left as example.

Your set-up is straight lens stacking, and your procedure, as outlined, is exactly correct.
The math is straight forward: 100-mm/50-mm = 2:1 magnification = 2x life-size at MFD.

I am going to change the title of this thread to make it more relevant to you described procedure.

P.S. - Your new images are quite interesting. I will take your word that they are daisies!

It is not the best idea to use tele-extenders for macro work. Extension tubes work much better. Please read:
FAQ: Extension Tubes vs Tele-Extenders vs Thread-on "Close-Up" lenses
http://www.uglyhedgehog.com/t-26496-1.html

NONE of your posted photos are macro-photographs; ALL are close-up photos. Please read:
Introduction to True Macro-Photography Forum
http://www.uglyhedgehog.com/t-22447-1.html#311675

As posted (without tight cropping), your close-up photos can be captured with nearly any lens, and are appropriate for the general Photo Gallery, not the True Macro-Photography Forum.

Many macro lenses are used to take full-face or bust portrait photographs of people. That does not make those portrait photos "macros". Your macro lens can focus to infinity for landscape photographs. That does not make such scenic photos "macros". It is not the lens that determines if a photo is a macro, it is the magnification reproduced on the sensor. If the image on the sensor is exactly the same size as the subject, it is a macro-photograph. Macro lenses do this better than any other lens., but they also take close-up photos, like your first image.

The second photo (pussy willow?) appears to be 1:1 (life-size), which is a true macro-photograph.

Unless the flowers in your first photo are the size of a match head, the image is a close-up photo, not a macro. Any lens, including telephotos & macros, can take a close-up photograph. As per our definition in the Introductory thread, this forum is strictly for macro-photography.

Your post is exactly what we are hoping to have as reference for novice focus-stackers. Excellent!

We wish you well, and look forward to seeing new images as seen through your new eyes.

Many of us have never Photo-Stacked.

UHH invite ALL photo-stackers to post photos of their set-ups, and info about their copy-stands, tripods, rails, electronic timers, etc.

Suggestions about ISO selection, aperture settings, distant traveled between images, number of images (per distance), also encouraged.

Educate us!

This thread is strictly for macro images compiled with focus-stacking programs. Please provide a little text about process, number of original images, and name of program used. One "standard" narrow DOF image would be appreciated for comparison purposes.

I have start a new thread entitled "Focus-Stacking Macro Subjects". Please contribute both images and discussion.

Please take a look at the new UHH forum on Macro-Photography at http://www.uglyhedgehog.com/s-102-1.html . You will find examples of macros with specific lenses, and discussions about differences on macro focal lengths.

In this forum, permission must be obtain from image owner before any editing by a second party is allowed.