Pages: [1]   Go Down

Author Topic: Focus stacking comparison - Natural history, small specimens  (Read 1581 times)

Isaac

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3123
Focus stacking comparison - Natural history, small specimens
« on: March 09, 2016, 02:16:02 pm »

Quote
In this manuscript we present a focus stacking system, composed of commercial photographic equipment. The system is inexpensive compared to high-end commercial focus stacking solutions. We tested this system and compared the results with several different software packages (CombineZP, Auto-Montage, Helicon Focus and Zerene Stacker). We tested our final stacked picture with a picture obtained from two high-end focus stacking solutions: a Leica MZ16A with DFC500 and a Leica Z6APO with DFC290. Zerene Stacker and Helicon Focus both provided satisfactory results.
Logged

E.J. Peiker

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 891
    • http://www.ejphoto.com
Re: Focus stacking comparison - Natural history, small specimens
« Reply #1 on: March 25, 2016, 11:02:10 am »

Highly informative and detailed.  Thank you!!!
It would be interesting to add Photoshop's built in stacking capability to the study.
« Last Edit: March 25, 2016, 11:08:19 am by E.J. Peiker »
Logged

kirkt

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 604
Re: Focus stacking comparison - Natural history, small specimens
« Reply #2 on: March 28, 2016, 01:04:46 pm »

... or align_image_stack + enfuse, which are free.

kirk
Logged

wmchauncey

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 793
Re: Focus stacking comparison - Natural history, small specimens
« Reply #3 on: April 06, 2016, 12:44:08 pm »

Quote
It would be interesting to add Photoshop's built in stacking capability to the study.
I use PS 2015 a lot for stacking, simply because I use it for everything else...
I've tried others and have found that they all require some occasional fixing of artifacts.
Logged
The things you do for yourself die with
Pages: [1]   Go Up