![]() ![]() ![]() My experience is that they will hold their breath for a period of time (assuming they are calm) and then occasionally take a big breath of air. The vast majority of my photography is of pit vipers. ![]() Assuming the light did not change drastically and the frog did not change position from one sequence to the next, would this be a recommended strategy?Ģ. Since Zerene is dedicated focus stacking software, it does the job. Whereas Zerene Stacker has proven itself to be smoother and more streamlined. Zerene is a standalone application that can process Tiff and JPEG images into focus stacks. Suppose I swapped out all the exhale shots from the sequence for an inhale shot from one of the other sequences, in an attempt to have a stack of all inhale shots. FixThePhoto Choice: Helicon Focus is very easy to use and supports RAW files, offers features to optimize stacking and creates 3D files from a stack. For each focus point, there’s a reasonable chance that I’ll have at least one photo where the the frog is inhaling. Suppose I run a sequence of focus shifts on the frog, then I do it again, one or more times. You get straight to the point, include all the necessary information, and somehow manage to answer nearly all the questions I had coming into each video.ġ. With the 16 bit TIF pipeline there is actually. So I stuck with 16 bit TIF export to test Zerene Stacker. Zerene Stacker does not have any raw support yet (which makes me surprised). Helicon Focus supports raw pipeline with DNG input and output. Great workshop, Steve! You have a gift for teaching. First of all, Helicon Focus has a big advantage over Zerene Stacker in terms of pipeline. So, are these pre-adjustments even necessary then? To me it seems like you are doing the same steps twice at the additional costs of being able to edit a stacked Helicon raw file (which presumably is more powerful than editing an already processed TIFF) !! ? You say they are minimal, but in the field you are also shooting manual to make sure lightning doesn’t drastically change. I guess I am confused quite a bit by the necessity for the pre-processing adjustments. Or is it even necessary to first make these adjustments? If Helicon uses raws and also preserves the output file as raw, would it not be more powerful to do these adjustments on the final stacked raw file (and potentially save an editing step)? But would it make sense to export as DNGs instead of TIFFs and then use Helicon, which can deal with raw files? I guess, if you always are adjusting the files in lightroom first, using the raw files is kind of obsolete, because these are necessarily just that “raw”. I am tempted to go with Helicon, because of that. I know that Zerene Stacker does not accept raw files, but Helicon does. Is there a reason, why you are always exporting as TIFFs ? ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |