|
Justan
|
 |
« Reply #20 on: August 03, 2011, 10:49:03 AM » |
 Reply
|
>As a side note, I have been using the "stack" feature in CS5's "scripts" function ... but just downloaded a Zerene Stacker (last night, in fact) which many experienced macro stackers seem to feel is the way to go. So I will be experimenting with this new tool starting today. another highly regarded stacker is http://www.heliconsoft.com/heliconfocus.html |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Christoph C. Feldhaim
|
|
« Reply #21 on: August 03, 2011, 10:57:23 AM » |
Reply
|
The images are great.
But since you asked for ideas and what could have been done better:
I imagine trying b/w conversions on some of the images could work well.
Cheers
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
JohnKoerner
Guest
|
|
« Reply #22 on: August 03, 2011, 02:38:36 PM » |
Reply
|
Thank you for that. It's pricing is about the same (~$300), but it sure does have a nicer interface than the Zerene Stacker. Are there any "advantages" over using these types of stacker over just using the stacker in the Adobe CS5 scripts function? (Better? Worse? Same?) Jack . |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
JohnKoerner
Guest
|
|
« Reply #23 on: August 03, 2011, 02:45:22 PM » |
Reply
|
The images are great.
But since you asked for ideas and what could have been done better:
I imagine trying b/w conversions on some of the images could work well.
Cheers
Hmm, there is something I have not considered. In general, I am a color fanatic, and find "color" to be the main attraction of certain species ...but I suppose that there are individuals/compositions that might be augmented through the simplicity of black & white. Interesting, thank you. Jack . |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
louoates
|
|
« Reply #24 on: August 03, 2011, 03:18:35 PM » |
Reply
|
>As a side note, I have been using the "stack" feature in CS5's "scripts" function ... but just downloaded a Zerene Stacker (last night, in fact) which many experienced macro stackers seem to feel is the way to go. So I will be experimenting with this new tool starting today. another highly regarded stacker is http://www.heliconsoft.com/heliconfocus.htmlWhen I compared CS5 stacks with my 1 yr old version of heliconfocus I couldn't see any difference. I've been quite happy with CS5 since. Note please that I don't do a lot of stacking. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
JohnKoerner
Guest
|
|
« Reply #25 on: August 04, 2011, 02:35:29 PM » |
Reply
|
Thanks for the info.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Heinz
Jr. Member
 Offline
Posts: 67
|
|
« Reply #26 on: August 04, 2011, 03:42:46 PM » |
Reply
|
A great set of images. Luv the natural light on them. Well done.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
JohnKoerner
Guest
|
|
« Reply #27 on: August 04, 2011, 06:55:28 PM » |
Reply
|
Thank you  |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
JohnKoerner
Guest
|
|
« Reply #28 on: August 05, 2011, 06:51:02 AM » |
Reply
|
When I compared CS5 stacks with my 1 yr old version of heliconfocus I couldn't see any difference. I've been quite happy with CS5 since. Note please that I don't do a lot of stacking.
I have answered my own question: The Adobe Photoshop CS5 stacker gave me, by far, the best results in really tricky stacking situations. Here is my report  Cheers! Jack . |
|
|
|
« Last Edit: August 05, 2011, 01:03:59 PM by John Koerner »
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Justan
|
|
« Reply #29 on: August 05, 2011, 11:33:14 AM » |
Reply
|
Sorry I missed your earlier inquiry re stacking sw. I haven't worked with image stacking sw yet so don't have an answer. But I clicked on the link you provided above but got an error.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
JohnKoerner
Guest
|
|
« Reply #30 on: August 05, 2011, 01:07:01 PM » |
Reply
|
Sorry I missed your earlier inquiry re stacking sw. I haven't worked with image stacking sw yet so don't have an answer. But I clicked on the link you provided above but got an error.
Sorry! I fixed the link. Hit refresh and try again if you're interested. If you look over each the whole images you will see duplicate "ghost" artifacts everywhere with the other programs, plus a ruined bokeh in the Helicon rendering, but none of this in the Adobe. Jack . |
|
|
|
« Last Edit: August 05, 2011, 01:08:39 PM by John Koerner »
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Justan
|
|
« Reply #31 on: August 05, 2011, 03:34:50 PM » |
Reply
|
Great blog article! Informative, concise and with great illustrations. I look foreword to seeing how the effects of focus stacking becomes added to your work.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
JohnKoerner
Guest
|
|
« Reply #32 on: August 05, 2011, 05:21:22 PM » |
Reply
|
Great blog article! Informative, concise and with great illustrations. I look foreword to seeing how the effects of focus stacking becomes added to your work.
Thank you Justan, I will be working on some. Cheers! . |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
JohnKoerner
Guest
|
|
« Reply #33 on: August 09, 2011, 05:17:45 PM » |
Reply
|
Had my single "stack comparison" result questioned, so I ran a much more intensive and exhaustive test on these 3 programs again, and once again the Adobe CS5 Extended prevailed every time. I ran tests on simple 2-stack images on basic images, to 13-image stacks on complex images, and Adobe CS5 simply shined compared to the other stacking programs IMO. ((( Full and Detailed Report Here ))) Jack EDIT: I have now added both of Zerene's stacking modes to this test, and for those who can't be bothered with reading and actually seeing the results for themselves (LOL), here is a summary: * Adobe CS5 Extended Stacker: First Place ( 7x out of 7) * Zerene Stacker (Pmax): Second Place ( Tied for First Place 3x, Second Place 3x, Loser 1x) * Helicon-Focus Stacker: Third Place ( Tied for First Place 1x, Second Place 2x, Loser 4x) * Zerene Stacker (Dmap): Last Place ( First Place 0x, Second Place 3x, Loser 4x) Click on the above link for full details  Jack . . |
|
|
|
« Last Edit: August 10, 2011, 01:57:17 PM by John Koerner »
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
JohnKoerner
Guest
|
|
« Reply #34 on: August 11, 2011, 05:56:54 AM » |
Reply
|
A few more ...  Long-Jawed Orb Weaver ( Tetragnatha pallescens)  Bark Lynx ( Hamataliwa grisea)  Twig Crab Spider ( Tmarus sp.) Jack . |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
