Wooden Motorcycle

Just bought that first macro lens? Post here to get helpful feedback and answers to any questions you might have.

Moderators: rjlittlefield, ChrisR, Chris S., Pau

Hack
Posts: 21
Joined: Tue Jan 19, 2010 11:03 pm

Wooden Motorcycle

Post by Hack »

I experimented with Stacking 3 frames using CombineZP and Zenene Stacker.

The first stack is by CZP, the second is by ZS.

Which do you think is best?

Image

Image

Hack

Hack
Posts: 21
Joined: Tue Jan 19, 2010 11:03 pm

Post by Hack »

And here is a photo I took by focusing at mid-mass.

Hack

Camera Make: Canon
Camera Model: Canon EOS 40D
Image Date: 2010:01:24 01:36:15
Flash Used: Yes (Manual)
Focal Length: 100.0mm
CCD Width: 22.25mm
Exposure Time: 0.0040 s (1/250)
Aperture: f/9.0
ISO equiv: 250
White Balance: Auto
Metering Mode: Matrix
Exposure: Manual
Exposure Mode: Manual

I used the same settings for the stacked images. For some reason when I right-click on the ZS stack, it won't tell me the EXIF data, the CZP stack will.Image

rjlittlefield
Site Admin
Posts: 23561
Joined: Tue Aug 01, 2006 8:34 am
Location: Richland, Washington State, USA
Contact:

Post by rjlittlefield »

The difference between your CZP and ZS images is that by default CZP does some sharpening and contrast enhancement, where ZS does not. This is why the ZS result looks like your single frame except for more DOF. If you edit the macros in CZP, you can turn those off.

ZS does not preserve EXIF data; CZP does.

--Rik

Hack
Posts: 21
Joined: Tue Jan 19, 2010 11:03 pm

Post by Hack »

Yeah, I'm not too keen on the enhancement done by CZP, to me makes it look kinda "artificial". I did notice that your ZS looked more like the single frame - that I like.

Hack.

ChrisR
Site Admin
Posts: 8668
Joined: Sat Mar 14, 2009 3:58 am
Location: Near London, UK

Post by ChrisR »

On my screen I can't see that the bike's OOF, only the backgound. So I prefer the single frame.... :smt011

rjlittlefield
Site Admin
Posts: 23561
Joined: Tue Aug 01, 2006 8:34 am
Location: Richland, Washington State, USA
Contact:

Post by rjlittlefield »

The difference is in the rear end, seat and behind. It's a bit blurred in the single shot.

From the standpoint of overall appearance, this scene illustrates a case where using a wider aperture and stacking can be helpful even at low magnification.

The issue is that "busy" background. It's easy for the cycle to get lost in the plaid fabric.

As shown here, the single shot gives better separation because the background is more OOF. The stacked result, shot at the same aperture setting, has the background sharper and hence more distracting.

But one could get the best of both worlds by opening the lens wider, maybe full open, and shooting a more closely spaced stack. That way the cycle could be fully in focus, with the background even more blurred than in the single shot here.

Hack, one comment about image comparisons. It's best if the images are identical except for the aspect being discussed. In this case, the images have different perspective, size, and framing, so it's a lot harder to tease out what's actually causing differences in appearance.

--Rik

Hack
Posts: 21
Joined: Tue Jan 19, 2010 11:03 pm

Post by Hack »

As far as size goes, I'm not sure how to make the two stacked ones identical. I tried to crop them as close as my old eyes could determine.

I think if I do it again, I'll use a solid colored background. I didn't think about the fabric of the sofa completing with the bike when I was taking the pics.

There's a lot more to photography, I'm realizing, than just aiming and pressing the shutter.

Hack

rjlittlefield
Site Admin
Posts: 23561
Joined: Tue Aug 01, 2006 8:34 am
Location: Richland, Washington State, USA
Contact:

Post by rjlittlefield »

Hack wrote:As far as size goes, I'm not sure how to make the two stacked ones identical. I tried to crop them as close as my old eyes could determine.
Oh, sorry. Those two were OK. I was really commenting on the two stacked versus the one single shot, responding to ChrisR's comment. The camera appears to have been moved between the stacks and the single shot. You can see that the motorcycle lines up completely differently with the background. More careful study indicates that the single shot was made from a higher viewpoint, with the camera pointing down more and moved a bit to the right. And the image sizes are different as posted, 800x533 versus 678×501.
I think if I do it again, I'll use a solid colored background. I didn't think about the fabric of the sofa completing with the bike when I was taking the pics.
Backgrounds are a perennial problem. We humans have selective attention, and it's very selective. When we're setting up a shot, our attention is focused on the subject. Completely insane stuff in the background gets overlooked just because it's not the subject. One of the checklist items for photographing people is "look to be sure there's no potted plant growing out of your subject's head".
There's a lot more to photography, I'm realizing, than just aiming and pressing the shutter.
And no matter how much you learn, the amount left seems to be unchanged!

--Rik

Post Reply Previous topicNext topic