Advice on Photo Stacking

[bags27]

I'm doing a book that includes a lot of photos of cemeteries. Most of it is done using both film and digital, as well as a drone.

I'd like to take a couple of photos that compress the distance to give a sense of density. I am shooting both a Blad 500 c/m and a Blad 907x 50c (sometimes putting the 50c on the back of the 500 c/m).

I've experimented with the 250 SA with the 2x mutar with the 50c on the 500 c/m, but the field of vision is too narrow. The 250 by itself is better. I also will try with the Blad V 100 f/3.5 for a wider view but still very sharp.

I also have 2 digital lenses: the X 30 and X 45p. I have two more V lenses: the 50 and 120 planar.

Of course it's on a tripod with a cable release.

When I've photostacked test groups, I'm less than impressed. Some things seem out of focus that shouldn't be, and generally it seems like a waste of effort.

Here's the best of them so far, bit it's a lot better than the rest. Anyone have tips or advice? thanks!!

 

[John Leathwick]

Stacking is a technique that I've done quite a bit of, but its hard to comment without knowing how you're taking your images and what you're using to stack them with. I use it mostly for macro now that I use a technical camera, and take up to several tens of images, combining them using Zerene Stacker. From the image you've shared above, it looks as if you might not have enough images to cover the depth of your subject (e.g., behind the second head-stone). If you do have images there, then it looks like your stacking software is letting you down. My experience of trying to stack images in Photoshop is that it can be quite unpredictable/idiosyncratic - that is what sent me to Zerene, which I find very reliable. There are other options out there as well, which others might like to comment on.

-John

 

[SrMphoto]

Both Zerene and Helicon are better focus stacking options than Photoshop.

 

[AlexeyDanilchenko]

If you are using Photoshop for stacking then unless your photos have lots of focus area overlap and you have plenty of them with tiny changes between zones in focus, forget it. Photoshop tends to produce rubbish results when there are still OOF areas that border with clear in focus areas with blotchy blobs of OOF all over.

The other stacking software mentioned are good but also one purpouse tool that you need to pay extra. Personally, I have bought a perpetual license for Affinity 2 photo editor long time ago (exploring alternative to Photoshop with thinking that Adobe one dat will become more greedy and drive the Photographer plan prices up) and use that for focus stacking - results are way better than PS and it manages to build a very good results with even non overlapping in focus areas or not exactly overlapping ones. Use it pretty much for all mystacking of floral images. I still try Photoshop every now and then but nothing is improved there.

 

[Fredrick]

1+ for photoshop being rubbish. Zerene or Helicon is the best from my limited experience. Zerene suits me best.

 

[bags27]

Thanks so very much, everyone, for this. I've heard of Zerene but was trying to avoid its costs (I get Photoshop free institutionally). But perhaps Zerene is unavoidalbe. The prosumer edition is US $189 and the personal edition is $89. Advice?

Also, I suspect it's trial and error as well as aesthetic taste, but does anyone have thoughts on best focal lengths for trying to get mainly depth but perhaps also some breadth of cemetery tombstones? Again, my options are: Hasselblad X lenses: 30 and 45. Hasselblad V lenses 50, 100, and 250 (though with the digital back, these lengths are reduced by around 30%).

Thanks again everyone for taking the time to respond.

 

[mristuccia]

I think that both Helicon and Zerene offer a 30-days free trial period, so before buying you can try them with some of your use-cases and decide which one suits your needs the best.
- my two cents

 

[rdeloe]

I use Helicon. It's good and lifetime. If you can try both Helicon and Zerene, why not give them a go. If you're going to do this a lot, it's worth it.