Experimenting with post-focus stacking for insects

GardenersHelper

In Memoriam
Messages
6,344
Name
Nick
Edit My Images
Yes
I have written the background to these images, and discussed various issues with them, in this post in my Journey thread. I have posted these images here for those who aren't interested in that thread but might like to see some of the images.

With the exception of #4, which is a single, diffused flash image, these are stacks created from 4K videos captured with my FZ330 and Raynox 150 or 250 close-up lenses using Panasonic's post-focus technology.

There are 1300 pixel high versions of these images over at Flickr.

This image is stacked from 113 4K (3328 x 2496) frames, which at 30 frames per second would have taken around four seconds to capture. It was captured using ISO 100, f/2.8 (equivalent to f/10 on APS-C, f/16 full frame), with a shutter speed of 1/60 sec, using a diffused LED light.

#1

1045 1 2016_11 STACK 261 113f (C)x(A) SP7 LR6 Df
by gardenersassistant, on Flickr

Now two stacks of a wasp, also using the LED light. This one was a stack of 90 frames, ISO 100, f/2.8, 1/50 sec.

#2

1045 2 2016_11 STACK 266 90f (C)(a) SP7 LR6 Df
by gardenersassistant, on Flickr

#3
77 frames, ISO 100, f/2.8, 1/60 sec

1045 3 2016_11 STACK 216 77f (C)(a) SP7 LR6 Df
by gardenersassistant, on Flickr

For comparison purposes, here is a single shot of the wasp captured using my usual technique of single shot using diffused flash and a very small aperture to maximise the DoF at the cost of loss of sharpness/detail.

#4
ISO 100, f/8, 1/1600 sec

1045 4 2016_11 SINGLE IMAGE P1180271_DxO RAW01a100 SP7 LR6
by gardenersassistant, on Flickr

Now a couple of a dead fly.

#5
Around 40 frames. ISO 125, f/4, 1/40 sec

1041 36 ISO 125, F4, 1-40 sec 426 (A,Radius3,Smoothing4) SP7 1300h
by gardenersassistant, on Flickr

I think I used a tripod for the next one.

#6
Around 110 frames. ISO 100, f/4, 1/50 sec.

1041 40 ISO 100, F4, 1-50 sec 667 (C) SP7 LR6 Df
by gardenersassistant, on Flickr


And finally, one more of the wasp, this one on a damp, foggy evening.

#7
Around 60 frames. ISO 100, f/2.8, 1/50 sec.

1041 35 ISO 100, F2.8, 1-50 sec 601 (C) SP7 1300h Df
by gardenersassistant, on Flickr
 
O h W o W What a great set and the detail on these are just fab, I dont think I could compete with these handheld shots.
The detail is really nice and as always your technique is on top form.
 
Some very nice and interesting shots there, Nick!! Good to see you're still on the button!

O h W o W What a great set and the detail on these are just fab, I dont think I could compete with these handheld shots.
The detail is really nice and as always your technique is on top form.

Thanks Dunc and Graham. I'm glad you like them. They are the imperfect best from in amongst a very large number of attempts. I need to work out how to get a higher success rate for this to be practical for insects etc. (The technique seems to be fine for flowers.)
 
Very good Nick though. Live insects must be so difficult to do I imagine.

Paul.

Thanks Paul. Yes it is difficult with this technique. The capture time is too long, from one to five or six seconds. I think focus bracketing should be much faster. And you would get full size images with that too, which could be raw rather than JPEG. But I don't have a camera that does focus bracketing at the moment. (And it was pretty much of a fluke that I found these subjects at this time of year anyway.)
 
Nice photos, however the dead fly is a bee or wasp, you can see these because it has 2 wings joined together, the unusual angle shows this beautifully. It is almost a textbook shot to show the wings in a hymenoptera.
 
Very nice Nick, #6 could have done with a couple more shots to cover the front of the right antenna, Focus stacking is so hard cause 1 missed section can ruin a photo which I so guilty of so many times.

:D
 
Very nice Nick, #6 could have done with a couple more shots to cover the front of the right antenna, Focus stacking is so hard cause 1 missed section can ruin a photo which I so guilty of so many times.

:D

Thanks Bryn. You are right about the missed area of course. This particular technique makes it tricky to know exactly where the front and rear boundaries will fall. For that and some other reasons I'm thinking that focus bracketing might be better, but I don't yet have a camera that will do that.
 
Thanks David.I am somewhat dysnomic so this sort of thing isn't uncommon unfortunately.

Incredible photos GH as usual (quite sickening how good you are compared to those of us who aren't :)) but WTF is dysnomic?
 
Incredible photos GH as usual (quite sickening how good you are compared to those of us who aren't :)) but WTF is dysnomic?

Thanks Peter. As to dysnomia, the Description paragraph on this page pretty much sums up where I'm at with this. (Not a recent thing, I've been like it all my life.) It doesn't generally appear in my writing because I can take the time to look words up or ask my wife. But using fly instead of bee mentioned above (even when I had previously referred to it correctly as a bee) is an example that slipped through.
 
Thanks Andrew. This approach to stacking does seem promising in terms of the detail possible with it. However I don't know how well it will work out with insects, spiders etc. I had a lot of trouble getting any half-decent stacks of these subjects, which were almost or in one case completely immobile. Most of the images were too flawed to be useful, and too much work (even if possible) to repair. How it will be in the Spring when the insects emerge and start moving around I don't know. There might some improvements I can make to the technique to up the success rate. For flowers though it seems to work much more often, often enough that I can see me using the technique quite a lot.
 
I've done a little bit of stacking on flowers, they are static so quite easy, I think I will buy a focus rail for nest season, the results should be better.

I'm finding the capturing easy enough. But the stacking not so much - I'm often getting artefacts that need dealing with. I'm starting to learn how to cope with them. From what I read it probably isn't a fault with my technique (although that my well be contributing to it of course), but it seems to be intrinsic to the process.
 
That post-production focus is a neat "gimic" that you are showing to be very useful. Canon need to do something like this - and pass it back in firmware!
I agree, I wouldn't get rid of my Canon but if it were stolen and I got a cheque to buy new cameras I am not sure if I would go for Canon.
 
I'm finding the capturing easy enough. But the stacking not so much - I'm often getting artefacts that need dealing with. I'm starting to learn how to cope with them. From what I read it probably isn't a fault with my technique (although that my well be contributing to it of course), but it seems to be intrinsic to the process.

What focus stacking I have done was using Affinity Pro
 
I have written the background to these images, and discussed various issues with them, in this post in my Journey thread. I have posted these images here for those who aren't interested in that thread but might like to see some of the images.

With the exception of #4, which is a single, diffused flash image, these are stacks created from 4K videos captured with my FZ330 and Raynox 150 or 250 close-up lenses using Panasonic's post-focus technology.

There are 1300 pixel high versions of these images over at Flickr.

This image is stacked from 113 4K (3328 x 2496) frames, which at 30 frames per second would have taken around four seconds to capture. It was captured using ISO 100, f/2.8 (equivalent to f/10 on APS-C, f/16 full frame), with a shutter speed of 1/60 sec, using a diffused LED light.

#1

1045 1 2016_11 STACK 261 113f (C)x(A) SP7 LR6 Df
by gardenersassistant, on Flickr

Now two stacks of a wasp, also using the LED light. This one was a stack of 90 frames, ISO 100, f/2.8, 1/50 sec.

#2

1045 2 2016_11 STACK 266 90f (C)(a) SP7 LR6 Df
by gardenersassistant, on Flickr

#3
77 frames, ISO 100, f/2.8, 1/60 sec

1045 3 2016_11 STACK 216 77f (C)(a) SP7 LR6 Df
by gardenersassistant, on Flickr

For comparison purposes, here is a single shot of the wasp captured using my usual technique of single shot using diffused flash and a very small aperture to maximise the DoF at the cost of loss of sharpness/detail.

#4
ISO 100, f/8, 1/1600 sec

1045 4 2016_11 SINGLE IMAGE P1180271_DxO RAW01a100 SP7 LR6
by gardenersassistant, on Flickr

Now a couple of a dead fly.

#5
Around 40 frames. ISO 125, f/4, 1/40 sec

1041 36 ISO 125, F4, 1-40 sec 426 (A,Radius3,Smoothing4) SP7 1300h
by gardenersassistant, on Flickr

I think I used a tripod for the next one.

#6
Around 110 frames. ISO 100, f/4, 1/50 sec.

1041 40 ISO 100, F4, 1-50 sec 667 (C) SP7 LR6 Df
by gardenersassistant, on Flickr


And finally, one more of the wasp, this one on a damp, foggy evening.

#7
Around 60 frames. ISO 100, f/2.8, 1/50 sec.

1041 35 ISO 100, F2.8, 1-50 sec 601 (C) SP7 1300h Df
by gardenersassistant, on Flickr

Some good shots and good comparison, too! Quite inspiring, I look forward to progressing mine, hopefully to get somewhere along the lines of yours at some point!
 
Some good shots and good comparison, too! Quite inspiring, I look forward to progressing mine, hopefully to get somewhere along the lines of yours at some point!

Thanks. Macro and close-up can be a bit of a struggle because it isn't entirely straightforward, but it is very satisfying as you get to grips with new subjects and techniques.
 
Thanks. Macro and close-up can be a bit of a struggle because it isn't entirely straightforward, but it is very satisfying as you get to grips with new subjects and techniques.
The best thing is that you get to see things which are not there. I often take a practice shot before I look for insects e.g. once I went to take a photo of a flower and saw a crab spider.
 
Back
Top