Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Clovishound" data-source="post: 821762" data-attributes="member: 50197">OK, this if for you Blackstar, and anyone else who is interested in the issue of DOF with macro. At the risk of a continued assault on a deceased equine, here are two images. I was lucky enough to spot a lynx spider sitting on some bushes in the yard. I got my gear out and decided this was a good subject for a focus stack. As I stated before, I don't often use focus stacking, but it is a great tool that yields results unobtainable by other methods. I mostly do handheld stacks, but after I kept drifting off my framing, I decided to grab the tripod and do it the "right" way.Anyway, here is the single image to give a comparison. IMO, this is a decent image, and the DOF is pretty good for something this close. I would not consider the shallow DOF to be a detriment to this image. FYI it was shot at F/16.[ATTACH=full]407735[/ATTACH]This was a stack of 6 images. Since I was shooting at F/16, I was able to get by with far less images in the stack than a lot of people use. I hear of folks often using 50-100 images, which seems like overkill to me. However, I do realize that if you have to use a larger aperture, it will definitely increase the number of images needed. I have had PS tell me I didn't have enough overlap to process a stack. I have also had some weird looking out of focus sections, presumably because I didn't have enough overlap, however, the software "thought" it was enough, but couldn't decide on the best portion of an image for a certain area.OK, I just noticed that I somehow missed focus on the near end of one of the front legs. I'll have to look at the second set of stacks I took as insurance. This doesn't overly bother me, but once you notice it, it's hard to ignore.[ATTACH=full]407736[/ATTACH]</blockquote>

Verification