Focus stacking question

[DanK]

looks good to me. I agree with Dem about the crop. This is why I always start with the closest shot; it's the largest image, and framing that insures that you have ample room when you make the stacked composite.

[skitterbug]

Hi Geoff - Thanks for checking the photo. I appreciate the positive comments!

A slightly tight crop, IMHO. I would try a 4x5 crop with a bit more room on each side.

Hi Dem - Thank you as well for the positive comments! And I do agree but I didn't have enough room on either side to have the ability to corp in the dimensions you recommend. So it will have to be a "next time" thing to do!

looks good to me. I agree with Dem about the crop. This is why I always start with the closest shot; it's the largest image, and framing that insures that you have ample room when you make the stacked composite.

Hi Dan - I appreciate that you like the photo!
By closest shot, you mean you are moving your camera slightly each time you take a shot or are you adjusting the lens mm? My lens isn't a telephoto one so I'd have to have some way to move my setup and still keep the same parameters in play. To accomplish what I did, I only changed the focus points. I'm not sure how I could start with "a closest shot" by using that method?

I was trying to capture an individual flower by still using the idea of focusing on different parts of the flower. Because it is still within the bouquet, it has background interference. I thought about cropping it to show the center of the flower instead of all of it. I did crop it close because of the background stuff intruding but still have an annoying yellow leaf to the top left that shouldn't have been there. I think I'll post it to see what you all think?

Thanks!

[DanK]

Sandy,

Sorry, what I wrote wasn't clear.

What I meant by "closest" is the part of the flower (or other subject) closest to the camera. If you create the stack by changing focus with the focus ring, as I do, focusing on the closest part of the flower will give you the largest image in the stack. As you move the focus point rearward, the image will become smaller. so if you frame with that first image, you don't run the risk of losing space you need as you create the rest of the stack.

Dan

[skitterbug]

Hi Dan - Thank you for the explanation! That is what I tried to do with the two pics in this thread. My bouquet is still in fairly decent shape so I may pick another flower and give this a try again, for the P52 project.

I've learned a lot but now it is putting things into practice and maybe upgrading my equipment.

Thanks for the replies I received!

[DanK]

Sandy,

If you will pardon unsolicited advice: if you are referring to camera equipment rather than lighting, tripods, etc., the equipment you have is fine for this. You have one of the best macro lenses on the market, so you are set there. And this is one of the forms of photography for which a better body doesn't buy you much. I don't follow the Rebel lines carefully anymore, but if I am right, yours has a pretty good sensor, and that is really all that matters for this kind of work. You don't need a stronger body, faster autofocus, more autofocus points, a faster burst rate, or the better ergonomics and controls that the more expensive cameras offer, as you won't end up using any of that.

It's the ancillary stuff that adds up when you do tabletop macro: a good tripod, a good tripod head, lighting, etc. And if you use continuous lighting, as I do, you need a very stable surface on which to work.

Dan

[skitterbug]

Hi Dan - you are correct about the camera body and macro lens. I can even move to the newly purchased Mark II body (refurbished) once I learn how to shift the focus points about without jiggling my camera.

It is my tripod that is rather suspect. It is a $60 variety (canon product) that was a gift when I got the Rebel. It is suitable so long as I am careful about how I set things up but it'd be easier with a sturdier tripod and the different head type. I looked at rails <yikes> those are expensive! I'd rather spend money on another lens I've been contemplating but cannot justify just yet. (EF 100-400mm F4.5 - 5.6L IS II USM to use for wildlife shots)

My lighting is also a hodge podge. I have two goose neck lamps.... <chuckle> My card table is covered in black and is held up on the back side by a very large piece of cardboard. There are four windows in the room and I've drawn the shades on those that would cause to much brightness. So this is all an experiment in process and I have much work to do!

Thanks for adding to the conversation! I appreciate it!

[Geoff F]

I would slightly and very carefully tone down the brightness on that red background flower in the bottom left corner. Maybe just a fraction on the top left corner as well. Otherwise this looks fine to me.

[DanK]

Hi Dan - you are correct about the camera body and macro lens. I can even move to the newly purchased Mark II body (refurbished) once I learn how to shift the focus points about without jiggling my camera.

It is my tripod that is rather suspect. It is a $60 variety (canon product) that was a gift when I got the Rebel. It is suitable so long as I am careful about how I set things up but it'd be easier with a sturdier tripod and the different head type. I looked at rails <yikes> those are expensive! I'd rather spend money on another lens I've been contemplating but cannot justify just yet. (EF 100-400mm F4.5 - 5.6L IS II USM to use for wildlife shots)

My lighting is also a hodge podge. I have two goose neck lamps.... <chuckle> My card table is covered in black and is held up on the back side by a very large piece of cardboard. There are four windows in the room and I've drawn the shades on those that would cause to much brightness. So this is all an experiment in process and I have much work to do!

Thanks for adding to the conversation! I appreciate it!

My indoor background is a black fleece jacket I bought on closeout at REI, draped over a wooden laundry rack one of my kids used in college. I have been saying for years that I ought to do something better but haven't gotten around to it.

I would personally rank a stable tripod and a good head way above a rail. A rail is handy, but it isn't essential. A tripod and head are.

I have a good ball head that works fine at the distance you had for the bouquet, but for flower macros, the sag is a real problem. A small amount of sag throws the composition way off when you are close enough for 1:1 or 1:2 photographs. I finally bought a Manfrotto Junior geared head, but it's expensive and bulky. I noticed that they now make a cheaper one too (just search "geared head" on the B&H website), but I don't know anything about it.

Dan

[skitterbug]

My indoor background is a black fleece jacket I bought on closeout at REI, draped over a wooden laundry rack one of my kids used in college. I have been saying for years that I ought to do something better but haven't gotten around to it.

I would personally rank a stable tripod and a good head way above a rail. A rail is handy, but it isn't essential. A tripod and head are.

I have a good ball head that works fine at the distance you had for the bouquet, but for flower macros, the sag is a real problem. A small amount of sag throws the composition way off when you are close enough for 1:1 or 1:2 photographs. I finally bought a Manfrotto Junior geared head, but it's expensive and bulky. I noticed that they now make a cheaper one too (just search "geared head" on the B&H website), but I don't know anything about it.

Dan

There are all sorts of tripods available... do you have a favorite brand? I know I would need one that can handle the weight of my equipment and then some since I eventually want to add to my kit.

On my current tripod, I see no way to switch out to a ball head? I'm trusting that a better tripod has the ability to swap heads?

I've been to B&H many times - I think I am addicted to the site!

Cheers! and Thanks!

[Geoff F]

If you are likely to be carrying a tripod any distance, Sandy, I would recommend carbon fibre, although a bit more expensive. Just for studio/garden etc then a cheaper aluminium version is good.

I use a Manfrotto but there are others which are equally good. Check that the legs are easy to adjust. My 3 section Manfrotto folds up to 30 ins which is a bit cumbersome at times so I have to strap it outside my camera backpack. For easy carry lighter use I have a 4 section Velbon which folds to 15 ins which fits inside the backpack. That is far more versatile to carry around all the time just in case I need a tripod and I have successfully used it with my 7D and a 150-600 lens.

However, for serious use on those days when I know that a tripod will definitely be used for most shots I take the Manfrotto.

For general use and particularly with insect work where I require quick variations but total holding power with no creep I have a Manfrotto ball head (468MGRC4) but once again there are other equal alternatives. That one gives absolute holding power when locked but also works as a panning head when lightly adjusted.

[DanK]

Sandy,

Almost all good tripods allow you to switch heads. In fact, most are sold without heads.

I use a carbon fiber tripod because I use it outdoors and often carry it a fair distance, sometimes on my back. However, it is very hard to recommend a specific one. Tripods are among the most difficult purchases because there are so many different features, and people have different preferences. To give you just one example, many landscape photographers prefer a tripod that has no center post because the center post is less stable. I insisted on a center post because I invert it to hold the camera (upside down) at ground level for some macro work. Sorting all this out is time-consuming.

I looked at a bunch at B&H one day when I was in NY. Then I went through their site at home, examining a lot of mid-priced brands, and made a spreadsheet showing what features each had. I eventually settled on an Oben (B&H's store brand), but that was years ago, and there have been enough changes since then that I would do it all over again if I lost my tripod.

Dan

[skitterbug]

If you are likely to be carrying a tripod any distance, Sandy, I would recommend carbon fibre, although a bit more expensive. Just for studio/garden etc then a cheaper aluminium version is good.

I use a Manfrotto but there are others which are equally good. Check that the legs are easy to adjust. My 3 section Manfrotto folds up to 30 ins which is a bit cumbersome at times so I have to strap it outside my camera backpack. For easy carry lighter use I have a 4 section Velbon which folds to 15 ins which fits inside the backpack. That is far more versatile to carry around all the time just in case I need a tripod and I have successfully used it with my 7D and a 150-600 lens.

However, for serious use on those days when I know that a tripod will definitely be used for most shots I take the Manfrotto.

For general use and particularly with insect work where I require quick variations but total holding power with no creep I have a Manfrotto ball head (468MGRC4) but once again there are other equal alternatives. That one gives absolute holding power when locked but also works as a panning head when lightly adjusted.

I spotted this tripod that looked interesting but I think I'm going to have to study them for a bit before I finally decide. I'll probably do a lot of grumbling, gnashing of teeth, etc. before making any sort of purchase. That's just the way I am - I never want to make a wrong decision so making none keeps me safe! But seriously, thanks for offering ideas of what I should look for! I want one before spring/summer gets underway.

[skitterbug]

Sandy,

Almost all good tripods allow you to switch heads. In fact, most are sold without heads.

I use a carbon fiber tripod because I use it outdoors and often carry it a fair distance, sometimes on my back. However, it is very hard to recommend a specific one. Tripods are among the most difficult purchases because there are so many different features, and people have different preferences. To give you just one example, many landscape photographers prefer a tripod that has no center post because the center post is less stable. I insisted on a center post because I invert it to hold the camera (upside down) at ground level for some macro work. Sorting all this out is time-consuming.

I looked at a bunch at B&H one day when I was in NY. Then I went through their site at home, examining a lot of mid-priced brands, and made a spreadsheet showing what features each had. I eventually settled on an Oben (B&H's store brand), but that was years ago, and there have been enough changes since then that I would do it all over again if I lost my tripod.

Dan

Hi Dan - I used a spread sheet when I was sorting out what sort of camera body I wanted to move into and it does help.
You and Greg seem to be in agreement - carbon fiber seems to be the most favored material and a decent ball head is a good choice. I'll want a tripod to support my equipment properly. I'm 5' 9" so it won't need to be extremely tall unless there is good reason why it needs to be super tall?

I do wish I had a camera store close by. I believe the nearest decent one would be either Dayton (which I know absolutely nothing about) or Columbus. It might be time to plan a 'day trip'! Hopefully, the winter weather settles down and the roads stay clear.

Thanks for the additional info. Chime in anytime you'd like!

[DanK]

Sandy,

I think you are being wise to take your time with this.

To complicate your decision further: I would be wary of kits that include a head and legs. The quality of one doesn't necessarily match the quality of the other. That's not to say that this isn't a good head--I don't have any data--but I personally would not buy a head unless I read good reviews or had a chance to try it. Moreover, you may have reasons to select differently from the array of legs and heads. And sad to say, while carbon fiber legs can be had at moderate prices now, good heads tend to be expensive.

For example, all other things being equal, a larger ball will give you smoother movement. However, all things aren't equal. I carry mine around, often hiking considerable distances with it strapped to a backpack, and my back is no longer young and has been injured in the past. Therefore I didn't want a large and heavy head. I bought a modestly priced head when I bought my Oben legs, and while it was OK, there were times when I found that it wasn't as smooth as I wanted, and I had a difficult time framing as I wanted. I ended up buying a second head, a Markins that I think was the predecessor to this one (https://www.markins.us/product-page/...uick-turn-knob) because reviews consistently ranked it as one of the smoothest of the small, lightweight heads. I have been very pleased with it, but it cost me more than the tripod did.

That's not to say that you should buy a Markins or spend $300 on a head. I'm just suggesting that you evaluate heads and legs separately and don't feel constrained to buy the same brand of both. I would, however, suggest limiting yourself to heads that have an arca-swiss compatible clamp because you will otherwise be limited to one brand.

Dan

[JohnRostron]

Some time ago, I posted a thread on Focus Stacking using Lens or Rail. In post #15 i give a photograph of a cardboard cut-out I use for gradual adjustment of the focus position. That post gives the necessary details.
John

[Geoff F]

I don't know anything about MeFoto gear, Sandy but that one gives a total load of 26 lbs which is good. I have just checked my camera and biggest lens which come in at 9 lbs so that would leave plenty of spare capacity.

[skitterbug]

Dan is right - it is complicated trying to decide about tripods/heads, etc. I like the look of the MeFoto tripod but of course I wouldn't really know what it is like until I saw it and used it. I have noticed Geoff, that the cost goes up with the amount of weight that the tripod can hold! I certainly don't need the very best but I want something much better than what I currently have. And I also want to have the ability to swap out heads - I don't want a proprietary type of tripod. Whew! Decisions to be made.

[billtils]

Very nice indeed Sandy.

[skitterbug]

Very nice indeed Sandy.

Thank you Bill!