Best stacking program?

MiniD3 · Post by **MiniD3** » Fri Oct 05, 2012 8:32 pm

Hi Guys,
I've tried combine ZP and the trials of Helicon and Zerene,
The thing is, I did not know what I was doing so could not tell good from bad
Tried this image as my second attempt which obviously needed a rail and some stacking, besides some added skill

Decided to wait until I get set-up, and then have another go
Tapping the tripod backwards and forwards is somewhat agricultural

Regards,
Gary

rjlittlefield · Post by **rjlittlefield** » Fri Oct 05, 2012 9:11 pm

This came out pretty well.

Stacking live aphids is notoriously difficult because of subject movement. They may look like they're just sitting there, but those legs and antennae are more mobile than they seem.

See HERE for an interesting example. Be sure to watch the movie.

--Rik

MiniD3 · Post by **MiniD3** » Sat Oct 06, 2012 2:12 am

Thank you for the tips,
Would Zerene be the most popular here?
Regards,
Gary

Craig Gerard · Post by **Craig Gerard** » Sat Oct 06, 2012 2:23 am

Gary,

What lens/camera were used for this image and do you recall the settings, aperture, etc?

Minor adjustments using the focusing ring may yield sufficient images for a shallow stack (a method preferrable to 'tapping the tripod').

Craig

MiniD3 · Post by **MiniD3** » Sat Oct 06, 2012 3:35 am

Hi Craig,
I used a D700 and a reversed Ai 35mm 1.4,

I do not recall the settings, just shot manual,

Bit of a "rush job" actually, also had a tiny red spider, then lost him, later to find he was sitting on the camera,

The other were small lady bugs who flew away just before I pressed the shutter,

Haven't tried the focus ring as I thought I had to set that to infinity?
Regards,
Gary

NikonUser · Post by **NikonUser** » Sat Oct 06, 2012 4:10 am

MiniD3 wrote: Would Zerene be the most popular here?
Gary

Popularity would need a vote.
I have used all 3 you mentioned and found Zerene to be the best and now use it exclusively - a fantastic piece of software.

MiniD3 · Post by **MiniD3** » Sat Oct 06, 2012 4:49 am

NikonUser wrote:
MiniD3 wrote: Would Zerene be the most popular here?
Gary
Popularity would need a vote.
I have used all 3 you mentioned and found Zerene to be the best and now use it exclusively - a fantastic piece of software.

Appreciate the heads-up,
Unfortunately, when I had the trial, i did not know what I was really doing, (still don't

), but I'm sure some direction from this website will sort it out
Regards,
Gary

rjlittlefield · Post by **rjlittlefield** » Sat Oct 06, 2012 10:02 am

NikonUser wrote:
MiniD3 wrote: Would Zerene be the most popular here?
Gary
Popularity would need a vote.

A vote of sorts can be obtained by searching Flickr for Zerene Stacker, Helicon Focus, and CombineZ OR CombineZM OR CombineZP, and checking the "results" count at bottom of page just under the page navigation bar.

At present, the numbers from Flickr show that more images are tagged with Zerene Stacker than the other two softwares combined (6508 versus 3509 and 2681). This is especially interesting in view of the longer history of Helicon and CombineZ. During the period that I've been monitoring, since May 2011, the daily posting rate has averaged almost twice as high for Zerene as for the other two combined. The statistics for all programs tend to be skewed by a few unusually prolific posters, but perhaps the numbers will give you some idea of popularity in the general audience. In the stacking community here at photomacrography.net, it's probably more than 10:1 in favor of Zerene.

My own concerns are about producing high quality images with the least amount of time retouching. Some tests relevant to that aspect are shown HERE. The ability to attack the "transparent foreground" problem via Stack Selected is also unique to Zerene. It makes a big difference in deep high magnification stacks.

For most people, it's relevant that Zerene includes retouching and 64-bit support at all price points, where with Helicon those come only in the expensive version. That makes Zerene less than half the cost of Helicon for perpetual licenses at the Personal level.

Disclaimer: I wrote Zerene Stacker so I'm biased. That's one of the reasons I go to so much trouble to specify what I care about and to objectively document tests relevant to that.

--Rik

Craig Gerard · Post by **Craig Gerard** » Sat Oct 06, 2012 4:17 pm

MiniD3 wrote:Haven't tried the focus ring as I thought I had to set that to infinity?

I'm confused by this revelation. Are you using the 28mm in combination with another 'stacked' lens or as a standalone?

Craig

MiniD3 · Post by **MiniD3** » Sat Oct 06, 2012 4:35 pm

Thank you Rik for taking the time to give such an informative and detailed reply,
Also appreciate the links, very interesting stuff,

Another question? Sorry!

When reading through your links, I also noticed some discussion about Raw images, which created another question,

1. What is the best file format for stacking? (tiff, jpeg etc)

Lastly, if I buy Zerene stacker for my PC, and then eventually get an iMac, do I have to pay for another program?

Regards,
Gary

rjlittlefield · Post by **rjlittlefield** » Sat Oct 06, 2012 4:57 pm

MiniD3 wrote:What is the best file format for stacking? (tiff, jpeg etc)

It depends. For short stacks, especially if I'm rushed in the shooting or I don't have full control over the light, then I think it's best to shoot raw and convert to 16-bit TIFF to preserve maximum flexibility for fixing up color balance and curves either before or after stacking. For deep stacks shot in studio where I have lots of time and full control over the lighting, I prefer to shoot high quality JPEG in camera. That gives essentially the same quality final result but takes fewer gigabytes of disk for the source images.

Lastly, if I buy Zerene stacker for my PC, and then eventually get an iMac, do I have to pay for another program?

No. Zerene Stacker runs native on Windows, Mac, and Linux, and a single key is good on all platforms. Mix-and-match if you like.

I used a D700 and a reversed Ai 35mm 1.4,
...
Haven't tried the focus ring as I thought I had to set that to infinity

There's definitely no reason you have to keep the 35mm focused on infinity. There are some combos involving high power microscope objectives where the tube lens has to stay at or near infinity focus, but otherwise it's pretty much "whatever works".

If you're using a reversed lens by itself, then for some lenses the focus ring may be useful for stacking (see for example HERE), while for other lenses it will accomplish nothing at all. I don't know about the one you're using.

If you're using a short lens reversed in front of a long one, then certainly the focusing ring of the rear lens can be used to adjust focus. It will be more or less effective depending on whether the rear lens is "front focusing" or "internal focusing", but it should work either way.

--Rik

MiniD3 · Post by **MiniD3** » Sat Oct 06, 2012 5:14 pm

Craig Gerard wrote:
MiniD3 wrote:Haven't tried the focus ring as I thought I had to set that to infinity?
I'm confused by this revelation. Are you using the 28mm in combination with another 'stacked' lens or as a standalone?
Craig

I'm just using a Nikon Ai, (aperture indexing), 35mm f1.4 reversed
I have used a 105 with the 35mm reversed on the end for other shots
Regards,
Gary

MiniD3 · Post by **MiniD3** » Sat Oct 06, 2012 5:16 pm

Much appreciated Rik,
Now to do my "homework"
Regards,
Gary