Stacking Software is for Sissies!

drdane

Subtitled: "Real Men do it by Hand" :huh (couldn't resist! )

Seriously, software is a great time saver, but there will always be times when you'll need to do it yourself, so it's good to know how.

When I first learned how to do stacking last spring, it was the manual method. A couple months ago, I heard of Helicon Focus and tried that. It saves a ton of work if the images are well aligned, but you can forget it if there has been subject movement.

The butterflies in this image moved a bit between frames, so I had to do it the long way. The final image had 20 layers, each one an in-focus piece of the picture, selected with the free lasso tool (featherd from 10-20 px). The feathering allows it to blend with its immediate background - be careful not to cut your selection too close or you will lose part of the image you're transferring.

I added the layers from back to front, and sometimes had to rotate or resize one slightly for the best alignment (using Edit>Transform or Free Transform). I recommend you try this with a small focus set (stack) first so you can get the hang of it, and avoid complex stuff like overlapping dragonfly wings.

The shots were taken from a tripod with a 100mm f2.8 macro, moving the focus slightly for each shot. To reduce swaying in the breeze, the flower stalk they were sitting on was attached to an old tent pole I stuck in the ground with a "double-ended" clothes pin (two clothes pins glued together on one of their "arms," with the business ends facing out). It helped that it was early morning and they were still too cool to move around much. This is the best way I've found to get close to butterflies, but it has to get down to around fifty for a good torpor.



EXIF: http://www.inner-light-images.com/photos/newexif.mg?ImageID=169303605

(As an aside, I've noticed that the Helicon program adds a lot of contrast to the final image, at least when I'm processing raw images. I haven't asked them about this yet, and there may be a fix for it.)

Blessings,
Dane

Lord Vetinari

Excellent result whatever method you use
I quite frequently do stacks by hand now but not like you- I tend to use the healing brush tool.
Brian V.

Awais Yaqub

Very cool picture loved it

drdane

Lord Vetinari wrote:

Excellent result whatever method you use
I quite frequently do stacks by hand now but not like you- I tend to use the healing brush tool.
Brian V.

Thanks, Brian!

Are you using the healing brush from one image to the other, as if you were "cloning" over to the new image? I've hardly used the healing brush at all, but I can see that this could be useful. It wouldn't allow for rotation or resizing, however, (unless it is done on a new layer, I suppose) which are helpful at times.

Oh, BTW, there is a duplicate thread posted below this one - perhaps you or Skippy could delete it. I didn't see a way to do this. I think this occurred when was posting an Edit, but it didn't seem to take, and the program wanted me to log in again.

Lord Vetinari

drdane wrote:

Thanks, Brian!

Are you using the healing brush from one image to the other, as if you were "cloning" over to the new image? I've hardly used the healing brush at all, but I can see that this could be useful. It wouldn't allow for rotation or resizing, however, which are helpful at times.

Yes- healing from one to the other- You just rotate one pic as required before you do it or if really necessary resize a pic first.
Brian V.

drdane

Awais Yaqub wrote:

Very cool picture loved it

Thank you, Awais! Hey, I'm glad to see you in this forum - I didn't know you were interested in macro - but on second thought, I would guess that you are interested in LOTS of things!

Blessings,
Dane

drdane

Lord Vetinari wrote:

Yes- healing from one to the other- You just rotate one pic as required before you do it or if really necessary resize a pic first.
Brian V.

Cool! I'll try it out when I get back to some macro shots again.

Thanks!
Dane

Skippy

drdane wrote:

Subtitled: "Real Men do it by Hand" (couldn't resist! )

Seriously, software is a great time saver, but there will always be times when you'll need to do it yourself, so it's good to know how.

When I first learned how to do stacking last spring, it was the manual method. A couple months ago, I heard of Helicon Focus and tried that. It saves a ton of work if the images are well aligned, but you can forget it if there has been subject movement.

The butterflies in this image moved a bit between frames, so I had to do it the long way. The final image had 20 layers, each one an in-focus piece of the picture, selected with the free lasso tool (featherd from 10-20 px). The feathering allows it to blend with its immediate background - be careful not to cut your selection too close or you will lose part of the image you're transferring.

I added the layers from back to front, and sometimes had to rotate or resize one slightly for the best alignment (using Edit>Transform or Free Transform). I recommend you try this with a small focus set (stack) first so you can get the hang of it, and avoid complex stuff like overlapping dragonfly wings.

The shots were taken from a tripod with a 100mm f2.8 macro, moving the focus slightly for each shot. To reduce swaying in the breeze, the flower stalk they were sitting on was attached to an old tent pole I stuck in the ground with a "double-ended" clothes pin (two clothes pins glued together on one of their "arms," with the business ends facing out). It helped that it was early morning and they were still too cool to move around much. This is the best way I've found to get close to butterflies, but it has to get down to around fifty for a good torpor.
EXIF: http://www.inner-light-images.com/photos/newexif.mg?ImageID=169303605

(As an aside, I've noticed that the Helicon program adds a lot of contrast to the final image, at least when I'm processing raw images. I haven't asked them about this yet, and there may be a fix for it.)
Blessings,
Dane

Hi there drdane...... Brian stacks some of his shots by hand too
Time and effort can really pay off on a shot.

But only you know what you put into it, when we see it, we see just the finished shot and have no clue all the trouble you had to go to to create it.

Brian uses a program (free) called CZM works really well too.

Love your finished shot thanks for sharing....... Skippy

drdane

Skippy wrote:

. . . But only you know what you put into it, when we see it, we see just the finished shot and have no clue all the trouble you had to go to to create it.

(Hi, Skippy!) Ain't that the truth!

Brian uses a program (free) called CZM works really well too.

I tried to google this, but got a lot of stuff on Coastal Zone management - can you tell me where to download it? I'd be interested in comparing . . .

Thanhks,
Dane

Skippy

drdane wrote:

(Hi, Skippy!) Ain't that the truth!

I tried to google this, but got a lot of stuff on Coastal Zone management - can you tell me where to download it? I'd be interested in comparing . . .

Thanhks,
Dane

Here you go ........ check out this LINK

Lots of very useful information and Tutorials right at the top of this FORUM.

http://www.dgrin.com/showthread.php?t=50752

.... Skippy
.

drdane

Skippy wrote:

Here you go ........ check out this LINK

Lots of very useful information and Tutorials right at the top of this FORUM.

http://www.dgrin.com/showthread.php?t=50752

.... Skippy .

Well, Duh! When in doubt, read the directions, huh? Well, I did read through the first sticky . . .

Thanks, Skippy!
Dane

Dalantech

Well done!

I hate stacking, so I would have looked for an angle that would allow me to get the plane of sharp focus parallel to both butterflies. I know it's not always possible

drdane

Dalantech wrote:

Well done!

I hate stacking, so I would have looked for an angle that would allow me to get the plane of sharp focus parallel to both butterflies. I know it's not always possible

Thanks!

Six months ago I'd have done the same thing, but I'd have had to let something go if I chose that mode on this pair, as they didn't read the rules and weren't lined up - the nerve of some critters!

Shooting for stacking does have its side-effects. It eats pixels like crazy, especially in raw mode, where I like to shoot. It takes extra time to shoot, and considerable time to process if the automation doesn't work out, which is not unusual. Also, it only works if the subject will hold still long enough for you to get the set.

It's main advantages are the ability to have a nice, soft background while maintaining good DOF in your main subject. Lord V might be able to cite others, but these two are enough to keep me coming back for more.

But there is another way that can work for subjects with relatively smooth outlines that you can extract from an image. Basically, you shoot two pics of the same subject, preferrably with a tripod, one at f4 and another at f11 (or whatever combo works for you). Extract the subject from the f11 shot and paste it on top of the f4 shot. It's still a lot of work. I'll post a couple of examples in a new thread when I get some open time.

Tessa HD

i must say, i had no idea so much work went into a shot like this! it's beautiful and well worth your time and effort!