www.photomacrography.net :: View topic - Stacking comparison for midge antennae
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 
Stacking comparison for midge antennae

 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    www.photomacrography.net Forum Index -> Macro and Micro Technique and Technical Discussions
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
rjlittlefield
Site Admin


Joined: 01 Aug 2006
Posts: 17693
Location: Richland, Washington State, USA

PostPosted: Wed Apr 08, 2009 2:10 pm    Post subject: Stacking comparison for midge antennae Reply with quote



In an earlier posting, Carl Constantine asked for a comparison of various stacking packages.

What appears above is one comparison for a situation that I run into frequently.

You're looking at the antennae of a midge, shown also HERE (whole body) and HERE (this same stack, post-processed for gallery display).

This is a deep stack of a hairy subject shot at high magnification -- 87 frames at 11X onto the sensor.

The four images are unretouched output from Zerene Stacker PMax, CombineZP "Pyramoid Max", and Helicon Focus Methods A and B. No processing of any kind on these except to scale them down, adjust the color balance and levels (same for all images), and adjust (reduce) the contrast of the CombineZP image to more or less match the others.

What I find particularly telling in these images are:
1. Presence/absence of halo around the thorax and front leg.
2. Obliteration of the main shaft of the rear antenna in the HF images.
3. Presence/absence of banding in the OOF background.

I enjoy discussing the fine points of stacking.

But for this subject, I think the case is decided well before we get down to the fine points. For my purposes, the two HF images shown here are not helpful, and I have never been able to find any combination of parameter settings that make HF work well for this type of subject. So my choices are basically a) radically adjust my standards, b) don't shoot this type of subject, or c) use some other software.

For this subject, the CombineZP output is pretty good too, and we would have to get down to discussing the fine points. There are other subjects where CZP has more obvious drawbacks, but I'll show those separately.

--Rik

Versions:
Zerene Stacker Version 0.9 Build T200904032045
CombineZP version 22nd of March 2009
Helicon Focus 4.75.5 X64 release 15 March 2009

Parameter settings:
All default, except the HF brightness adjustment was enabled and set to its max of 30%.
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 -> Macro and Micro Technique and Technical Discussions 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