Hot answers tagged focus-stacking
Focus stacking allows you to create an image with a greater apparent depth of focus (i.e. more of the subject in focus) than would otherwise be possible. This is used in fields like macro photography where you are often working at the limits of the capabilities of the lens.
There is a good article over at DPS about focus stacking which documents one way of doing it including post processing in Photoshop.
If you are taking photos of something stationary, then a focusing rail will allow you to do them perfectly. If you are talking about moving things, like insects, then all you can do is take a lot of photos. If you aren't able to focus reliably without a tripod and rail, then you can use burst mode. But, with some practice, you can get to the point where ...
Always use as much data as you can. It's actually easier to reduce noise when there's more information to begin with. (Reducing resolution is a brute-force noise removal tool, throwing away both noise and signal.) If you're still concerned about the size final image, reduce the resolution at that point, after flattening.
There is a good article about focus stacking using command line tools align_image_stack and enfuse (both included in Hugin).
You can also use the hugin toolset which includes the align_image_stack and enfuse tools. You may also wish to add the EnfuseGUI to cut down on the typing. Works very well Free & Open Source Multi-platform runs on Mac/Windows/Linux There is a very nice walk through here.
Use focus stacking. Why would a photographer do focus stacking? What are the best practices for DOF stacking? What software is available for macro focus stacking? What are the disadvantages of focus stacking?
I believe you are looking for something like Helicon Focus. I've heard from reliable sources that stacking can also be done manually in Photoshop CS 5, but I haven't done it myself.
In Photoshop CS5 or later, load your images into layers. Select Edit > Auto Align Layers (at macro distances even on a tripod small changes in focus will alter the perspective of each shot) Select Edit > Auto Blend Layers. This will select the sharpest parts of each layer and create a mask. The masks can be quite complex, but it does a very good job. ...
A macro lens' maximum magnification can only be achieved at minimum focus. So to get maximum magnification you must move the camera towards or away from the subject to focus a specific area of it. That is the main advantage of using a focus rail. In the case of stacking images, though, maximum magnification in every frame is probably of secondary ...
An alternative to focus stacking is to tilt the plane of focus so that it is parallel to the object you are trying to photograph. Usually the plane of sharpest focus is parallel to the film/sensor plane of the camera, however by tilting the lens relative to the camera the plane of focus can be tilted so that it is aligned with the longest axis of your ...
A friend of mine recommended ImageJ in combination with the Stack Focuser plugin for combining the images into a single image with an extended depth of field. He mainly uses it for microscope images. I've also found good references for CombineZP. Although there's not much info on the site there is a yahoo user group for it for more information and this ...
IMO focus stacking isn't very useful for landscape photography, it's more useful in macro photography, but for landscapes there are better ways to get good focus. check out this online depth of field calculator to get an idea about DOF in different settings. Anyways, about your question, I must say it's possible to get a good result in focus stacking if you ...
You are right about the disadvantages of focus stacking, also, the process of taking pictures for focus stacking (taking multiple pictures at different focus ring positions and getting every bit of the picture sharp in at least one picture) can be a bit technically challenging. That is why traditionally landscape photographers solve this issue by using a ...
The only way to counteract focus breathing directly is to buy a lens that doesn't breath. The other option is to move the camera as a whole closer and further from the subject. This will image the entire object at the same magnification with enough shots, but you will run into perspective issues.
As I know, depth of field is not exactly the same in front of and behind focus plane. One third of area in focus is in front of focused point and two thirds are behind this plane. So if you want to have whole your object in focus, you should focus to some point which is approximately in one third of depth of object. Especially when you don't have closer ...
Another disadvantage not mentioned before is: Focus stacking takes a lot of time, in particular in the postprocessing phase. This is a multi-step process, (comprising at least align+stack). You need to get familiar with special-purpose software, and there are countless ways to try different parameter settings at the PC. Tiniest erros add up and must be ...
My own experience with doing similar things would suggests that you should take all the pictures you need to take in one go using a using a tripod (note that tripods are cheap). The workflow for the projects I've done looks as follows. You take pictures with a tripod and remote control at the lowest ISO setting available. You should use manual focus and ...
I just increased the DOF from 3.2 to 8 and all the halo just went away. Please note I did play around with increasing the radius setting but that didn't make a difference.
A lot would depend on whether you need continuous focus through the scene or have more discrete points of interest. A micrometer (geared) rail can make it very fast and easy to make sure that you have complete coverage of the depth of a scene with greater precision than manual focus simply because the adjusting mechanism is finer and the scale is linear. ...
You are simply making the wrong assumptions. Just "playing around" and thinking you see a correlation doesn't mean that it actually exists. You've just fixed the sensor format at APS-C, aperture at f/22 and tried varying the focal length and subject distance a bit and thought that you saw a correlation. However if you try these settings for example: f/2.8, ...
I don't have too much to add, but I have some limited experience with focus stacking on microscopes that I can share. I've done focus stacking on an SEM, the following image is a stack of only two images. I wish I had a third to fill in the blur in the middle. Image of a flower I took with a scanning electron microscope. The near foreground and the 'sky' ...
I have just written a focus-bracketing script for closeup lenses, including the Raynox 250. Here is a link to my article, which contains documentation of the script as well as the script itself: http://www.dpreview.com/articles/9780512447/focus-bracketing-scripts-for-macro-setting-and-for-closeup-lenses Here is another link to some outdoor stacked images ...
One solution has been omitted for this question - most people who stack actually tend to use Zerene Stacker - it's the only package that has various user generated plugins for substack slabbing. If you look through Flickr there are twice as many Zerene pics as there are for Helicon. Helicon is faster though and suits lab workers better, ZS better for ...
I think it is worth mentioning that if you are a Canon person, Magic Lantern has a great focus stacking utility that will let you set the number of shots in front and the number behind as well as the size of the focus shift for each shot. It will take the series of shots and even generate a little script that can be used with Hugin to merge.
Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible