Focus Stacking Issues.....

Tiny · Post by **Tiny** » Sat Oct 01, 2011 11:10 am

Hi,

After reading behind the scenes for several months, I eventually got around to giving stacking a go, using Helicon (for me it seemed to give better results than Zerene). I am quite dissapointed with the images and dont know where I went wrong. There seems to be 'ghosting' around the image, more evident in the seccond image. Any advice is welcome.

The first is a 62 image stack taken with a Nikon 200 f4 micro lit by two flashes at .225 intervals

The seccond is a stack of about 25 (I cant remember exactly

) taken with a Nikon 55 f2.8 reversed on 68mm of extension tubes lit with two flashes hand held.

Oh, appologies for spelling mistakes

Mark

rjlittlefield · Post by **rjlittlefield** » Sat Oct 01, 2011 6:43 pm

Mark, welcome aboard!

Assuming each stack is shot in one continuous sequence, then this looks like what happens if you're using Helicon's Method B and have exposure variations from frame to frame. In Helicon, go to View > Preferences > Autoadjustment tab, and put a checkmark on Brightness.

By the way, I'm the fellow who wrote Zerene so I'm very interested in what it did badly for you. Normally a simple PMax will come out pretty good on a deep mechanical stack like this, and if it doesn't, then the result will often give clues about what went wrong. Any chance you can post out whatever bad result you got from Zerene, and if it wasn't PMax, then a PMax also?

Thanks,
--Rik

SONYNUT · Post by **SONYNUT** » Sun Oct 02, 2011 12:38 am

are you using a rail or freehand?

Tiny · Post by **Tiny** » Sun Oct 02, 2011 12:53 am

Thanks for the reply and the welcome Rik,

I will give what you suggest a go. Zerene seemed to produce an image with more ghosting, it is probably just my incometance/inexperience though... I dont have the zerene images I deleted them as I did with some of the Helicon ones, just to save space.

I am using a stackshot.

Craig Gerard · Post by **Craig Gerard** » Sun Oct 02, 2011 1:50 am

Tiny wrote: ...snip... lit with two flashes hand held.

Mounting the flash units relative to the subject will also provide a more consistent outcome for incremental slices as opposed to using them handheld.

Craig

rjlittlefield · Post by **rjlittlefield** » Sun Oct 02, 2011 7:48 am

Tiny wrote:Zerene seemed to produce an image with more ghosting, it is probably just my incometance/inexperience though...

I look forward to seeing the images. It's hard to tell whether I'm reading your words the same way you meant them. The word "ghosting" means different things to different people, and the different things have very different causes and cures.

In the meantime, filling in some more information...

PMax is quick and easy to use, and it's the preferred method for subjects with complicated geometry, like small bristly flies. However, it's prone to produce broad diffuse dark halos around bright objects against a dark background, so it's not the best choice for a subject like you have here.

The DMap method will produce better results. It's more difficult to use well, however, because there's a slider you need to adjust, and some other parameters that could further improve the results for this stack. See the new tutorial, "How To Use DMap", for a detailed discussion.

Hope this helps!

By the way, I'm glad to hear you got a StackShot -- it's a marvelous piece of equipment.

--Rik

Harold Gough · Post by **Harold Gough** » Mon Oct 03, 2011 12:31 am

Even if you are using flash to freeze any movement, tiny air currents can easily change the position of fine/light/flexible parts of the subject beween shots or even the leaf an insect is sitting on. This can mean that succesive frames do not all register.

As a new user of Zerene, using PMax, I had this problem. (See comment posted Sat Jul 16, 2011 10:56 am):

http://www.photomacrography.net/forum/v ... ight=praon

Harold

Tiny · Post by **Tiny** » Sun Oct 16, 2011 12:41 am

rjlittlefield wrote:..................
The DMap method will produce better results. It's more difficult to use well, however, because there's a slider you need to adjust, and some other parameters that could further improve the results for this stack. See the new tutorial, "How To Use DMap", for a detailed discussion.

Hope this helps!

By the way, I'm glad to hear you got a StackShot -- it's a marvelous piece of equipment.

--Rik

Thanks Rik!

That link has helped immensely!! It looks such a good tutorial, I can see where I went wrong (I think)…

Mark

Chris S. · Post by **Chris S.** » Sun Oct 16, 2011 2:56 am

Hi, Mark--and another welcome to you!

With your Nikkor 200mm and a StackShot, you have "best of breed" equipment for the magnification range of the shot you posted. In keeping with that, I'd strongly suggest you have another go with Zerene Stacker, as it is the best of breed stacking software. I've only tried Helicon a few times, but have not found it to remotely compare with Zerene Stacker.

I think the advice was very sound to mount your flashes so they don't move. Movement of the flashes may well be giving you trouble.

In your first shot, 62 images strikes me as a heck of lot of images for this kind of shot. Would you mind sharing what camera you are using, what aperture you used, and what units your ".225 intervals" are in? I have this lens, and for this shot, would probably use f/11 on a crop frame camera or f/16 on full frame. Since I don't know the size of this flower, I don't know how many images you would need at these apertures, but my guess is something around 12. While I shoot some very deep stacks (1500 images or so)--I would expect a better and easier result could be obtained with this subject by stopping down a bit and using a shallower stack.

Cheers,

--Chris