www.photomacrography.net :: View topic - What focus stacking s/w do you use?
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 
What focus stacking s/w do you use?

 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    www.photomacrography.net Forum Index -> Beginners Macro
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
mlackey



Joined: 08 Jan 2012
Posts: 17

PostPosted: Mon Jan 09, 2012 4:04 pm    Post subject: What focus stacking s/w do you use? Reply with quote

My MP-E is on it's way. Time to start thinking about focus stackign s/w.

What do you use, and why do you think it's better than other s/w packages?
_________________
Best regards,
Mike
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
rjlittlefield
Site Admin


Joined: 01 Aug 2006
Posts: 18244
Location: Richland, Washington State, USA

PostPosted: Tue Jan 10, 2012 12:34 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Mike, welcome aboard! Smile

Your question comes up often enough that maybe we should write a FAQ about it. For now, let me summarize.

Here at photomacrography.net, something like 90-95% of recently posted stacks are done with Zerene Stacker. The remaining 5-10% are done with CombineZ* (CombineZM or CombineZP), Helicon Focus, or Photoshop CS5. Among the larger community posting at Flickr, daily average stacks over the last 8 months have been about 6.15 for Zerene Stacker, 2.08 for CombineZ*, 1.48 for Helicon Focus, and I can't tell for Photoshop.

Major advantages and disadvantages for each product are the following:

Zerene Stacker:
+ makes better images with challenging subjects, especially complex structures at high magnification. (See "An image comparison of Zerene Stacker and Helicon Focus" for more information on this point.)
+ includes built-in retouching and 64-bit mode in the $89 Personal Edition.
+ runs native on Windows, Mac, and Linux
- handles only JPEG & TIFF; raw files must be converted using other software.

Helicon Focus:
+ provides integrated support for raw images (versus ZS which requires an explicit conversion step using other software).
+ includes a dust map capability that reduces artifacts caused by dirty sensor.
+ runs native on Windows & Mac.
- is more vulnerable to halos and stacking mush.
- costs $200 to get retouching and 64-bit mode.

CombineZP:
+ provides the widest choice of stacking methods.
+ is free and open-source.
- runs only on Windows and Windows emulators.
- handles 8-bit images, not 16 bits.
- user interface is not smooth, especially for retouching.

Photoshop CS5:
+ stacking is fully integrated with other pieces of Photoshop (and comes for free if you have Photoshop)
- usually produces worse artifacts than the other tools
- no controls to affect the outcome

Disclaimer: I'm the fellow who wrote Zerene Stacker, so I have an obvious conflict of interest. On the other hand I'm also motivated to understand the differences and I've spent a lot of time doing that. I've tried to confine my comments to verifiable facts; I'd surely appreciate being informed if I've messed up any of them.

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



Joined: 08 Jan 2012
Posts: 17

PostPosted: Tue Jan 10, 2012 8:14 pm    Post subject: Thank you. Reply with quote

rjlittlefield wrote:

+ makes better images with challenging subjects, especially complex structures at high magnification. (See "An image comparison of Zerene Stacker and Helicon Focus" for more information on this point.)


Brain cramp!

Seriously, pretty convincing. Maybe you should request that this post (or the one mentioned above) be made "sticky"?

I'll be in touch (via your website) as soon as I get the lens unpacked and have taken a few shots. Unfortunately I'm out of town this weekend. I've done macro before, and while familiar am not expert. I cannot wait to see what I can accomplish with a virtually unlimited depth of field, I am really looking forward to this, I only wish I had known about "focus stacking" earlier, I only discovered this recently while searching for more than 1:1 macro. Can't wait to see what is possible.

Thanks for the reply, I really do appreciate the comparison.
_________________
Best regards,
Mike
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
macrochemistry



Joined: 05 Jan 2012
Posts: 36
Location: Kiel, Germany

PostPosted: Wed Jan 11, 2012 4:21 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

There are many more stackers

Anyone tried this stacker?: http://bigwww.epfl.ch/demo/edf/
It's able to make 3D pics and it's free

What about http://photoacute.com/studio/
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
rjlittlefield
Site Admin


Joined: 01 Aug 2006
Posts: 18244
Location: Richland, Washington State, USA

PostPosted: Wed Jan 11, 2012 9:33 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Yes, I listed only the ones that I see used most often. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Focus_stacking currently lists 7 more programs, in addition to the 6 that have been listed so far in this thread. I know at least 3 others that are not on Wikipedia's list (Syncroscopy Automontage, Picolay, and SAR Image Processor). I haven't tested all of them recently, so I will be interested to hear reports from other users.

--Rik
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    www.photomacrography.net Forum Index -> Beginners Macro 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