MicrostockGroup
Microstock Photography Forum - General => General Photography Discussion => Topic started by: brm1949 on May 15, 2013, 16:22
-
Has anyone had success with stacked images from Zerene or Helicon focus.
-
I experimented with both, Helicon Focus quite a long time ago, Zerene much more recently. I regard Zerene as the more capable, and if I were to do this in any serious way I would get the Pro edition. I also have PhotoShop CS4 Extended which has similar functionality in PhotoMerge. Thus far I've been most successful with PhotoMerge...
Are you asking out of curiosity or do you have a serious interest?
Regards
-
Serious interest. Started playing around with Zerene and ControlMyNikon software and like the results. I was wondering about the rejection rate for stacked images across the sites.
-
There is a member here who does a lot of the macro focus stacking. I think it is Rimglow?
-
I've been doing it for years with great success. No rejections. In fact, it seems to be very desirable on Shutterstock, where focus is a premium. I use Photoshop CS6, Auto-Align, Auto-Merge, but I usually tweak the masks. Sometimes Auto-Merge gets it wrong.
I tried Helcon, but could see no advantage over Photoshop. As a buyer, shallow depth of field drives me crazy.
-
I submitted one stacked image that was accepted by iStock (may have taken it down, can't remember). My experience is rather similar to Rimglow's.
My effort was really an experiment, but I'm curious what it is that you are photographing that requires this treatment. I think Rimglow will confirm - this technique requires quite a lot of effort for each image; it's not for a high-volume production shop. Like Rimglow, I also found PhotoShop's masks needed some tweaking...
Regards
-
Just testing the waters, this is what I got so far.
-
I do find it time consuming to say the least, but I love macro, bugs in particular and want to spend this summer doing that.
-
What's the actual process to create a photo merge? How many images and do you focus on different parts of the subject them merge them?
-
The one I posted was 37 images combined.
-
What's the actual process to create a photo merge? How many images and do you focus on different parts of the subject them merge them?
Adobe's terminology is not helpful because they use the term PhotoMerge for two distinct processes. This discussion is about a series of images taken in the same direction with small movements of the camera/subject on a fixed axis. Adobe also applies the term to the process of creating a panorama, multiple shots in different directions with the camera pivoting around a fixed point (which ideally coincides with the no parallax point).
Regards
-
I have a few that sell ok, but they were a lot of work to produce. Maybe if I got the workflow down or had a more automated system for taking the stacked images it would be worthwhile. As it is I think for most subjects it is probably only worth it if you want to create the image outside of the microstock universe - and then you might as well keyword and sell it. If you get your subject matter and workflow down it could be a good source of decent selling images.
-
Just testing the waters, this is what I got so far.
Have to say, that just looks like a regular macro image.
-
The one I posted was 37 images combined.
How do you get a bug to stay still that long? I know you posted a flower, but you said you wanted to do bugs.
-
Strawberry blossom about the size of very small pea. As I said, just testing the waters. Without the stack would not have been able to get the shot.
-
Strawberry blossom about the size of very small pea. As I said, just testing the waters. Without the stack would not have been able to get the shot.
Indeed. I'm just curious about the bugs. I did one last week and it was moving so fast up a sheer cliff I had to take the camera off the tripod as I couldn't keep up.
-
Early morning shots are doable.
-
I've used Helicon Focus for several years, mostly on macro shots where I wanted the entire object in focus. They say you can use it for landscapes, starting with whatever is immediately in front of you (within inches) and extending out to the horizon. Personally I've never tried that. The longest object I've done is an old stainless steel veterinary hypodermic syringe. In perfect focus from the hole in the end of the needle to the plunger sticking out the back. I like placing objects on a bias where it is both on an angle and going away from the camera. For close-up, stacking is about the only way to get an adequate DOF and minimize distortion.
I tried using Photoshop's merge function, but could never quite get the hang of it (old CS2, I use CS4 now). For me, personally, Helicon works just fine, quick and easy. Others will have success with Photoshop or Zerene or whatever works best for their workflow. It pretty much boils down to what feels right to you and gives the results you are looking for.
-
Macro is my primary area of interest, do alot of it. I've been using Helicon for the past few years and have never had a rejection based on anything other than flat lighting (iStock). I often create the stack using a macro focusing rail which helps with comp and focusing.
There are 3 stacking methods within the Helicon program. I usually start with Method B and if I get too many artifacts I'll stack again using Method A or C.
The resulting image often needs some cleanup, particularly of edge blurring, in PS and yes, it is time consuming, but the end result is worth the effort.
Last time I looked at Zerene the stack images had to be Tiffs or jpegs (correct me if I'm wrong). I'm able to import my DNG's into Helicon.
-
I use Helicon for the same reason mentioned above - it will take raws but Zerene does not AFAIK. Helicon also is quite fast while Zerene took forever on my Mac - might work better with a PC. Helicon does make mistakes that have to be cleaned up but basically eliminates focus rejections, although it can take a lot of time. I use PS CS4 and Helicon is better - might not need it with CS6. I don't usually stack a ton of images - not worth it for microstock. From the example you posted, it looks like you know what you are doing already.
Has anybody used the Stackshot system (http://www.cognisys-inc.com/stackshot/stackshot.php (http://www.cognisys-inc.com/stackshot/stackshot.php))? It looks like a cool toy and I really want one but can't justify the price for microstock. If it will make a great improvement I'll try to talk myself into spending the money so if anyone has used it and thinks it's a good investment please let me know.
-
I did a few using an old version of photoacute a few years ago. That worked quite well but I had to tidy up a bit in photoshop elements.
I will try Zerene when I get some time, don't see a problem using tiffs.
-
Thanks for the advice, will continue to explore it.
-
What's the actual process to create a photo merge? How many images and do you focus on different parts of the subject them merge them?
Adobe's terminology is not helpful because they use the term PhotoMerge for two distinct processes. This discussion is about a series of images taken in the same direction with small movements of the camera/subject on a fixed axis. Adobe also applies the term to the process of creating a panorama, multiple shots in different directions with the camera pivoting around a fixed point (which ideally coincides with the no parallax point).
Regards
I've done this quite a bit, but MANUALLY, by eye.....resizing each image to match the other. Will definitely play with photomerge. The time to do this manually is a lot.
-
The one I posted was 37 images combined.
How do you get a bug to stay still that long? I know you posted a flower, but you said you wanted to do bugs.
I'm not sure if you're going to like the answer: they slow down when you chill them down - in the refrigerator if need be.
Obviously your favourite bug will be hoping you know what you're doing, but that is the way it's done.
Regards
-
What's the actual process to create a photo merge? How many images and do you focus on different parts of the subject them merge them?
Adobe's terminology is not helpful because they use the term PhotoMerge for two distinct processes. This discussion is about a series of images taken in the same direction with small movements of the camera/subject on a fixed axis. Adobe also applies the term to the process of creating a panorama, multiple shots in different directions with the camera pivoting around a fixed point (which ideally coincides with the no parallax point).
Regards
I've done this quite a bit, but MANUALLY, by eye.....resizing each image to match the other. Will definitely play with photomerge. The time to do this manually is a lot.
Wow - I doubt I have the eye required to do a high-precision warp like that. That will definitely take lots of time, PhotoMerge will be the fast lane at F1 Grand Prix by comparison.
Regards
-
What's the actual process to create a photo merge? How many images and do you focus on different parts of the subject them merge them?
It's not really called "photo merge". It's called Auto-Align, and then Auto-Merge. Here's my workflow: Say you want to shoot a bunch of grapes. Use a tripod. Turn off your auto-focus. Focus on the grape closest to the camera, and mark that spot on your lens and focus ring. (white pencil) Next, focus on the grape furthest away from the camera, and mark that spot on your focus ring. Now make a mark half way between your other two marks. I usually make 5 marks for 5 exposures at f.16. Shoot a photo at each mark. Now load all 5 exposures into the same file, (keep the layers in the right sequence) select all layers, and choose Auto-Align. You'll probably notice that some of the layers are a little brighter than others. Adjust the brightness so that they all look about the same. Next, with all layers selected, choose Auto-Blend layers. Choose Stack Images, but uncheck Seamless Tones and Colors. Now, you have masks on all the layers. Delete the mask on the last layer. I usually blur the masks a little. Then, go into each mask and paint out any obvious mistakes the program made, with a soft brush. After doing this a few times, you'll be surprised at how fast the process gets.
(http://i826.photobucket.com/albums/zz187/rimglow/WhiteGrapes2_zps11d485c3.jpg) (http://s826.photobucket.com/user/rimglow/media/WhiteGrapes2_zps11d485c3.jpg.html)
-
Very nice result, Rimglow. Which lens did you use for this?
REgards
-
Very nice result, Rimglow. Which lens did you use for this?
REgards
Canon EF 100mm f/2.8 Macro USM.
Can't remember if I used extension tubes or not, but I do occasionally.
-
Thanks. I am surprised at the depth you manged to achieve, very nice.
Regards