Focus stacking

P

Pippopappo

Messages
7
Edit My Images
No
Hi everyone.

How many of you use this technique, as opposed to shooting let's say F10 or so for landscapes? I know it to be more time-consuming, but it might yield better results from what I have seen.
Of course, it depends on the lens too, your wide-angle favorite lens might be tack sharp in the corners right at F8. But again,
 
I regularly use focus stacking in my images. I can shoot at f10 but still be too close to my foreground subject for everything to be in focus. It’s a pretty simple process which is what I like :)
 
right, it does indeed make a lot of sense if you're close to your foreground subject. Say you're low on the ground for instance.
The R5 has automated focus stacking, I believe... got to try it out yet!
 
Nikon_Nick said:
I regularly use focus stacking in my images. I can shoot at f10 but still be too close to my foreground subject for everything to be in focus. It’s a pretty simple process which is what I like :)
Click to expand...
you're doing this manually? If so, not sure how simple that would be. Unless you're on auto-ISO (and on a tripod of course...) you will have to compensate for your change in aperture?
 
Last edited:
Pippopappo said:
you're doing this manually? If so, not sure how simple that would be. Unless you're on auto-ISO (and on a tripod of course...) you will have to compensate for your change in aperture?
Click to expand...

I shot one recently (I don't do it often) with a slight change in aperture and ISO as I wanted to change exposure and focus point but not affect the shutter speed.

It was an easy manual blend though. I've not needed to attempt a stack that's more complicated or intricate really.
 
Pippopappo said:
you're doing this manually? If so, not sure how simple that would be. Unless you're on auto-ISO (and on a tripod of course...) you will have to compensate for your change in aperture?
Click to expand...
Yeah, very simple. Camera on a tripod and change nothing apart from the point of focus. Aperture and shutter speed stay the same.
 
I use it as and when needed. If I have a subject VERY close to the camera, like a flower or a bush that's perhaps 30cm from the lens and something in the distance like a mountain, then yes, I'll probably focus stack.

It's important to remember that the old hyperfocal distance (ie f11, focus 1/3 in etc) tip just means that everything within that range is technically in FOCUS. It does not mean its necessarily SHARP (or as sharp as you want). (mileage will vary depending on the characteristics of your chosen lens)

I've got an R5 that does it automatically, but is quicker just to do it manually.

If you are focus stacking a good tip I'd give is to bookend your stacks with your finger pointing to the near object at the start and the far object at the end (or the other way round if you start at the far object and end at the near one) . It makes it much simpler in lightroom to quickly see where the stack starts and ends! (good for panos as well!)

I'll also say there are times when it's the only option, this is typically when using longer (telephoto) focal lengths, where Hyperfocal doesn't really come into play, for example the last time I used it was to shoot a poppyfield with some rolling hills behind. I couldn't use a shorter focal length as it would make the poppy field look sparse, so a longer (200mm) focal length compressed the scene and made the field look incredibly dense but also captured the rolling hills behind. The only issue was that f11 the depth of field was too short so I focus stacked to get front to back sharpness.
 
Last edited:
GreenNinja67 said:
You don't change the aperture.

You take 2 or 3 shots at different focus points and then blend them in post.

All camera settings should be the same.
Click to expand...
It doesn't actually, or not necessarily. A challenging composition at 35mm, or worse 50, even 85mm with very close foreground will test you to the limits. Anything close and distant overlapping will create a trap that's too easy to fall into.
So my go to procedure is to use the sharpest setting for background and then as you move closer in say 2, 3 or 4, maybe even more steps depending on lens and scene you may want to close aperture down a little more and even use like f13-14 for the closest shot, and probably at higher iso if there is wind/movement. You can deal with diffraction using sharpen ai, but you can't deal with out of focus overlapping elements in any meaningful way. Then you do auto alignment but blend manually. Photoshop is still unable to do even remotely clean job
 
LongLensPhotography said:
It doesn't actually, or not necessarily. A challenging composition at 35mm, or worse 50, even 85mm with very close foreground will test you to the limits. Anything close and distant overlapping will create a trap that's too easy to fall into.
So my go to procedure is to use the sharpest setting for background and then as you move closer in say 2, 3 or 4, maybe even more steps depending on lens and scene you may want to close aperture down a little more and even use like f13-14 for the closest shot, and probably at higher iso if there is wind/movement. You can deal with diffraction using sharpen ai, but you can't deal with out of focus overlapping elements in any meaningful way. Then you do auto alignment but blend manually. Photoshop is still unable to do even remotely clean job
Click to expand...

not sure if it’s helpful but when I’m stacking in macro I take more shots in the stack than would be expected to be nessersary to make sure that there isn’t any out of focus elements , the focus increments on the R5 can be setup in advance
sorry if this doesn’t apply to landscape but I’ve had similar issues with macro stacking and deal with it that way by reducing focus increments and stopping down enough to ensure that there’s a good overlap
im using affinity photo to stack it seems to work well
 
keety said:
If you are focus stacking a good tip I'd give is to bookend your stacks with your finger pointing to the near object at the start and the far object at the end (or the other way round if you start at the far object and end at the near one) . It makes it much simpler in lightroom to quickly see where the stack starts and ends! (good for panos as well!)

I'll also say there are times when it's the only option, this is typically when using longer (telephoto) focal lengths, where Hyperfocal doesn't really come into play, for example the last time I used it was to shoot a poppyfield with some rolling hills behind. I couldn't use a shorter focal length as it would make the poppy field look sparse, so a longer (200mm) focal length compressed the scene and made the field look incredibly dense but also captured the rolling hills behind. The only issue was that f11 the depth of field was too short so I focus stacked to get front to back sharpness.
Click to expand...

(My bold). I always hold my hand over the lens to get an underexpose image before and after the sequence I'm shooting. Each sequence then really stands out in the film strip.
 
I do it now and again, only when I have a real close foreground and the backgrounds important (not often). I tend to do something similar to Jeff above (Fogey1) I shoot a frame of the ground though, I do the same after bracketing exposure so it's obvious where the end point is so to speak.
 
I stack images now and then but I generally try and compose and chose an aperture that gives acceptable sharpness without needing to stack because I'm usually chronically short of time and don't get around to all the post-capture faffery that is needed. That said I find it useful when I have something really close to the lens. I also shoot medium format half the time and the depth of field from the bigger sensors often necessitates stacking more than smaller full frame or APS-C sensors. Because: physics.

Funny and true story: I was once taking an image of a waterfall with a flower in the foreground in Glen Etive. I was there with the tripod, mounted the big Fuji on tripod, framed and composed, fired a test shot or two, chose an aperture, then started a 5 or 6 shot stack that I knew would need blending later in Photoshop or Helicon. There was a guy who arrived as I was finishing my shots and came to introduce himself as a fellow photographer. He was asking about the medium format and seemed interested. He said he's spotted the same composition and was waiting his turn. He then got out an Olympus, a tiny micro four thirds body, knelt down and took one shot, done. Showed me the result and from the back of the camera it was damn nearly sharp from front to back without having to blend five 205Mb files together when he got home. Moral of the story: bigger isn't always better.
 
Typhoon7 said:
Nice - proving the M4/3 point! How close to the lens was the chain?
Click to expand...

Thanks Mike
Probably about 50cm shot 8mm at f9.0 which I would usually use f8 and focus manually and set the focus distant at 1m on the lens and shoot away
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top