This information may be around somewhere but I didn't find it with a search.
I have recently acquired the Nikon MRL00102 and am trying to use it with a Nikkor 200mm, f4 lens.
So far I'm not too impressed with my results.
There seems to be a lot of purple fringing and the stack I've tried so far didn't come out very good. I used 1.25 mil steps (~32 microns) which may be too large, but I still expected better results than I got.
I stacked with Zerene Pmap and Dmap with defaults.
What processing is recommended before stacking?
Should I be attempting to clean up the purple fringing first?
What is the best workflow and processing steps for this setup?
I know a lot of people are using this 10x objective. Has anyone done a Lightroom correction profile for it?
Thanks.
microscope objective post processing best practices?
Moderators: rjlittlefield, ChrisR, Chris S., Pau
32µm ia too big a step, so you will have a lot of OOF image, which is where the longitudinal CA shows up.
Try 10µm, or a tad better, 5.
Having said that, yes, this objective does have it, as is shown in Robert Otoole's test
http://www.photomacrography.net/forum/v ... 102#240032
I haven't found it a big problem on real subjects, unless there's a lot of fine detail over a lot of blacks. I've not tried correcting it before stacking.
If you use a brush the same colour but weak, and "Subtract" mode, ....
I just tried it on Robert's test image. Select all the purplish parts, expand and feather a little, and make from that a new layer on top to adjust them. It may not be accurate, but it certainly stops it noticing.
Try 10µm, or a tad better, 5.
Having said that, yes, this objective does have it, as is shown in Robert Otoole's test
http://www.photomacrography.net/forum/v ... 102#240032
I haven't found it a big problem on real subjects, unless there's a lot of fine detail over a lot of blacks. I've not tried correcting it before stacking.
If you use a brush the same colour but weak, and "Subtract" mode, ....
I just tried it on Robert's test image. Select all the purplish parts, expand and feather a little, and make from that a new layer on top to adjust them. It may not be accurate, but it certainly stops it noticing.
Chris R
I'm going to need a finer lead screw to get below 1 mil steps.
It looks like Lightroom manual purple defringing of 10, 41/63 or purple Lum -49, Sat -51 do a fair job of reducing the purple on this particular image. I think in this case the purple fringe adjustment works a bit better than the Lum/Sat adjustment. Haven't done a stack after this adjustment, just trying on a single image.
I'd prefer to do it in LR rather than have to push each image through PS before stacking.
Thanks.
It looks like Lightroom manual purple defringing of 10, 41/63 or purple Lum -49, Sat -51 do a fair job of reducing the purple on this particular image. I think in this case the purple fringe adjustment works a bit better than the Lum/Sat adjustment. Haven't done a stack after this adjustment, just trying on a single image.
I'd prefer to do it in LR rather than have to push each image through PS before stacking.
Thanks.
I constructed a stage with ~ 200 microinch step resolution.
(http://www.photomacrography.net/forum/v ... hp?t=39021)
I took a little extra care setting up a test with some decent lighting diffusion and got a fairly good result.
10x Nikon PLAN with 200mm tube lens. 35 image stack at 200 u" steps (5 micron).
This is the ruled edge of a Starrett steel ruler. The rules are 10 mils on center. Images is ~0.085 inches across. First test with my Rube Goldberg stacking stage.
(http://www.photomacrography.net/forum/v ... hp?t=39021)
I took a little extra care setting up a test with some decent lighting diffusion and got a fairly good result.
10x Nikon PLAN with 200mm tube lens. 35 image stack at 200 u" steps (5 micron).
This is the ruled edge of a Starrett steel ruler. The rules are 10 mils on center. Images is ~0.085 inches across. First test with my Rube Goldberg stacking stage.