Fauxtoto
Established Forum Member
Quebec, Canada
Posts: 440
Open to constructive criticism of photos: Yes
|
Post by Fauxtoto on Sept 8, 2018 11:39:25 GMT
Helen,
You never stop, do you? Very nice.
|
|
alexr
Established Forum Member
Posts: 555
Open to constructive criticism of photos: Yes
|
Post by alexr on Sept 8, 2018 13:29:36 GMT
Regardless of how you captured it, it is lovely clear image. I have never tried focus stacking, although I recognise that because much of my macro is with extension tubes you end up with such a tiny depth of field it is something I need to experiment with, so it is great to see how well it can work. To help the discussion, on an EOS 7D at f/4.5 assuming a distance to the object of 0.35m (the minimum focusing distance for your 17-55, which I'm guessing you used - imgbb doesn't tell me) the depth of field works out at only 0.58cm and I'm guessing the shell is a couple of cm deep? If so, you will have needed at least 4 images to get it in, although 11 is perhaps a tad excessive! Of course, you are balancing depth of field with your lens's 'sweet spot' aperture, but by comparison, f/8.0 would give a depth of field of 1.04cm and f/22 would give 2.94cm. So in theory going to f/22 negates the need for stacking in this example, but actually is it any better? More experimentation needed...
|
|
|
Post by Peterj on Sept 8, 2018 16:21:07 GMT
alexr Perhaps my understanding is flawed. I thought that narrowing to f22 tends to increase overall diffraction. Am I mistaken?
|
|
|
Post by hmca on Sept 8, 2018 16:26:30 GMT
Thanks, Alex. I tend to not get too involved in the technical part of things and am just happy if the end results are what I was after. However, I am glad to see that the discussions following my post have added info that is helpful to others. For me the big takeaway was the reminder to use Live View that I gleaned from Judy's article.
|
|
|
Post by Peterj on Sept 8, 2018 19:45:51 GMT
If anyone would like to try Focus Stacking edit aspect without actually capturing images - here my images with which to play [3 jpg + 3 raw]
|
|
|
Post by Bailey on Sept 9, 2018 0:47:48 GMT
For anyone interested in getting a feel for what the DOF (depth of field) is for a particular situation and camera setup when photographing close subjects with or without a macro lens, this is one practical exercise you could try.
1. Mount your camera on a tripod or hand held is still ok since this exercise is just to get an idea of the DOF.
2. Set up a long or short ruler or tape measure horizontally so that the start of the ruler/tape is nearest the camera and the end farthest from the camera. Make sure the numbers graduations on the ruler/tape are legible in your viewfinder or lcd screen on your camera.
DOF is determined by the aperture, focal length and subject distance from the camera.
1. For a given focal length and subject distance from the camera the smaller the aperture (increasing fstop number) the larger the DOF.
2. For a given aperture and focal length, the greater the subject distance from the camera the larger the DOF.
3. For a given aperture and distance from the camera, the longer the focal length the shorter the DOF.
Using the above info, take several photos at various configurations of the above to get a feel for what the actual DOF is for your particular setup. You can then use some of these photos to practise focus stacking post processing to produce an image that is in focus/sharp from a starting point on the ruler/tape to an end point that could not be captured in a single shot.
This exercise should also give you an idea of how many photos you will need to successfully focus stack a particular situation in the future.
|
|
alexr
Established Forum Member
Posts: 555
Open to constructive criticism of photos: Yes
|
Post by alexr on Sept 9, 2018 17:49:51 GMT
alexr Perhaps my understanding is flawed. I thought that narrowing to f22 tends to increase overall diffraction. Am I mistaken? Nope, you aren't mistaken. The general rule of thumb is that the 'sweet spot' of any lens (i.e. where you will get best quality) is at 1 to 2 stops up from its widest aperture. So for an f/2.8 lens this is at f/4 to f/5.6 and for an f/4 lens this is at f/5.6 to f/8. Now, clearly sometimes you need to go outside these ideals to get the depth of field that you want, but I generally avoid going anywhere near f/22 - I only gave its depth of field value for comparison purposes as it gives the maximum, but I suspect focus stacking gives a better result than a single f/22 image, but I've never tried it, and perhaps this is really all academic and not discernible to us lesser mortals, hence my comment about more experimentation needed.
|
|
|
Post by Andy on Sept 10, 2018 1:58:43 GMT
Focus stacking is never something I've tried so I applaud you for taking the time to learn and practice Helen. I like the result!
|
|
|
Post by Bailey on Sept 10, 2018 2:01:05 GMT
Regarding a len's sweet spot, depending what you read the rule of thumb is also estimated as 2-3 stops from wide open. It really depends on the lens and manufacturer.
Since the aim of focus stacking is to get a sharp as possible image from front to back, knowing your len's sweet spot aperture can help a lot. It only takes a few minutes to find it by taking a series of test shots at different apertures and evaluating them at 100% on a computer screen.
|
|
|
Post by hmca on Sept 10, 2018 2:15:52 GMT
Thanks, Andy. I tried this one other time and in both instances I felt the images were much sharper/clearer than other work that I have done, although it could be a case of seeing what you want to see. I have a couple of more things I would like to try so I may post additional images during the next week.
|
|
|
Post by BuckSkin on Oct 4, 2018 17:21:17 GMT
|
|