www.photomacrography.net :: View topic - A bug
www.photomacrography.net Forum Index
An online community dedicated to the practices of photomacrography, close-up and macro photography, and photomicrography.
Photomacrography Front Page Amateurmicrography Front Page
Old Forums/Galleries
 
 FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   RegisterRegister 
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 
A bug

 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    www.photomacrography.net Forum Index -> Technical and Studio Photography -- Macro and Close-up
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
tevans9129



Joined: 30 Nov 2017
Posts: 129
Location: TN

PostPosted: Sun Jan 14, 2018 9:17 am    Post subject: A bug Reply with quote

The improvement is slow and labored but I am learning, thanks to the expertise of this group.

I am struggling with images that are crisp and not sure if it is the subject, the equipment, my incompetence or perhaps a combination. Please feel free to offer suggestions for improvements and altering the image is acceptable.

D800e, pb6 closed approximately 3.5x, cone, Amscope 4x, 1/200, ISO 100, 300 slices @ 12 microns, Controlmynikon, Stackshot, Zerene.

Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
rjlittlefield
Site Admin


Joined: 01 Aug 2006
Posts: 18792
Location: Richland, Washington State, USA

PostPosted: Sun Jan 14, 2018 12:16 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

This looks pretty good except for severe "transparent foreground" artifact on the lower parts of the legs.

See https://zerenesystems.com/cms/stacker/docs/tutorials/stackselectedfortransparentforeground for discussion of that.

For sharpness, it would be helpful to see some non-resized crops showing "actual pixels", as discussed at http://www.photomacrography.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=36168 .

What other aspects are bothering you?

--Rik
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
tevans9129



Joined: 30 Nov 2017
Posts: 129
Location: TN

PostPosted: Sun Jan 14, 2018 2:10 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

rjlittlefield wrote:
This looks pretty good except for severe "transparent foreground" artifact on the lower parts of the legs.

See https://zerenesystems.com/cms/stacker/docs/tutorials/stackselectedfortransparentforeground for discussion of that.

For sharpness, it would be helpful to see some non-resized crops showing "actual pixels", as discussed at http://www.photomacrography.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=36168 .

What other aspects are bothering you?

--Rik


Thanks much for the links Rik, I had no idea about the retouching that is explained in the tutorial. Studying that is definitely high on the list.

I cannot explain the "other aspects" it is just like something is not right, like the image is not crisp. I am not even sure that "sharpness" is the issue perhaps it is more like the image is "cloudy" for a lack of a better adjective.

I very much appreciate the comments.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
tevans9129



Joined: 30 Nov 2017
Posts: 129
Location: TN

PostPosted: Sun Jan 14, 2018 2:21 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Here is the cropped image at 100%. PS is good but it needs something reasonable to work with. But then my PS skills leave a lot to be desired also.



This is the Amscope at approximately 3.5x.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
tevans9129



Joined: 30 Nov 2017
Posts: 129
Location: TN

PostPosted: Sun Jan 14, 2018 3:42 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

This one I think, technically, is somewhat better. Open to all suggestions.

D800e, pb6 closed approximately 3.5x, cone, Amscope 4x, 1/10, ISO 100, 300 slices @ 13 microns, Controlmynikon, Stackshot, Zerene, 2 studio 300ii 1/16 lights.

Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
rjlittlefield
Site Admin


Joined: 01 Aug 2006
Posts: 18792
Location: Richland, Washington State, USA

PostPosted: Sun Jan 14, 2018 6:12 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I agree, this one does look better.

In the previous one, I think a lot of the cloudy appearance is due to the bright blueish background reflecting off the subject.

There may also be some spill into shadow areas through veiling glare. If you have not flocked that cone and possibly the inside of the rear bellows mount, then now would be a good time to do that.

But I notice that areas of the subject that are far away from background look much cleaner than areas that would be directly subject to reflections from the background, so I'm inclined to think that those reflections are more important than overall glare.

Your actual-pixels crop does not look sharp, but a lot of this is likely just diffraction at play. Your objective is what, NA 0.1? So then at 3.5X, you'll be running at about effective f/17. That's plenty small enough to provide diffraction blurring at actual pixels on a D800E.

The only good treatment for diffraction blur is aggressive sharpening, for example with unsharp mask at a size and strength that would reduce a non-diffracted image to junk. See the discussions at http://www.photomacrography.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=33724 and http://www.photomacrography.net/forum/viewtopic.php?p=203198#203198 .

--Rik
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
tevans9129



Joined: 30 Nov 2017
Posts: 129
Location: TN

PostPosted: Sun Jan 14, 2018 6:23 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

rjlittlefield wrote:
I agree, this one does look better.

In the previous one, I think a lot of the cloudy appearance is due to the bright blueish background reflecting off the subject.

There may also be some spill into shadow areas through veiling glare. If you have not flocked that cone and possibly the inside of the rear bellows mount, then now would be a good time to do that.

But I notice that areas of the subject that are far away from background look much cleaner than areas that would be directly subject to reflections from the background, so I'm inclined to think that those reflections are more important than overall glare.

Your actual-pixels crop does not look sharp, but a lot of this is likely just diffraction at play. Your objective is what, NA 0.1? So then at 3.5X, you'll be running at about effective f/17. That's plenty small enough to provide diffraction blurring at actual pixels on a D800E.

The only good treatment for diffraction blur is aggressive sharpening, for example with unsharp mask at a size and strength that would reduce a non-diffracted image to junk. See the discussions at http://www.photomacrography.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=33724 and http://www.photomacrography.net/forum/viewtopic.php?p=203198#203198 .

--Rik


Some good suggestions Rik, thanks. I will definitely look into flocking those areas. My diffusion could probably stand some attention also.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Deanimator



Joined: 23 Oct 2012
Posts: 476
Location: Rocky River, Ohio, U.S.A.

PostPosted: Mon Jan 15, 2018 4:18 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quite nice.

I also have issues with artifacts. I think a lot of it has to do with problems of exposure/lighting/diffusion.

You're definitely on the right track.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    www.photomacrography.net Forum Index -> Technical and Studio Photography -- Macro and Close-up All times are GMT - 7 Hours
Page 1 of 1

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group