My first practical night at the Photographic Society, and the subject was 'Focus Stacking'. At last, I thought, someone might be able to explain the workings (or lack of) of 'Combine ZP'. Not the highest of turn-outs ... seven members, to be exact, each with cameras and laptops.
Unfortunately, for half (OK, three) of the attendees - with Nikons - the tethered method, using Canon's EOS Utility, was lost somewhat. For myself, not in possession of PhotoShop CS5, I too was struggling to be able to follow the demonstration. Having made a suggestion of using EOS Utility to not only take the shots, but also adjust the focus, thus avoiding camera movement, I made my exit.
I came away with one question ... why, when trying to achieve maximum DoF, using stacking, would anyone choose f 2.8 or wider?!?!? The method was originally conceived by photomicroscopists to obtain sharper images and improve depth of field at very high magnifications using optical microscopes, where selecting a smaller (any) aperture was not on option. Surely, with modern DSLR cameras, a more sensible approach would be to use f 11, 16 or 22!?!
Anyway, what do I know?
Unfortunately, for half (OK, three) of the attendees - with Nikons - the tethered method, using Canon's EOS Utility, was lost somewhat. For myself, not in possession of PhotoShop CS5, I too was struggling to be able to follow the demonstration. Having made a suggestion of using EOS Utility to not only take the shots, but also adjust the focus, thus avoiding camera movement, I made my exit.
I came away with one question ... why, when trying to achieve maximum DoF, using stacking, would anyone choose f 2.8 or wider?!?!? The method was originally conceived by photomicroscopists to obtain sharper images and improve depth of field at very high magnifications using optical microscopes, where selecting a smaller (any) aperture was not on option. Surely, with modern DSLR cameras, a more sensible approach would be to use f 11, 16 or 22!?!
Anyway, what do I know?
No comments:
Post a Comment