On 12/20/2014 4:46 PM, John Hudson wrote:
Why would / how could ........... four images, one on top of each other, be superior to a carefully taken single image
of the same object ? The object's slightest movement would surely have upset the clarity of the final sandwiched images ?
The issue is DoF for relatively deep, 3D subjects. It's used extensively in microscopy, high mag macro and close-up
flower images.
There are all kinds of trickier things than bits moved by breezes, such as the change in absolute magnification between
'slices' and changing perspective, but the software deals rather well with those. So instead of going to v. small
apertures that soften everything, while not actually bringing the closest and furthest parts into focus, one may shoot
at optimum aperture.
That there is a product like the automated focus stacker Mike posted a link to is an indication of how important and
useful this is for some work.
In the case of the sample Steve just posted, he could get everything in focus by shooting perpendicular to the side of
the engine, but the image is far less interesting.
Deep Focus Moose
--
What if the Hokey Pokey *IS* what it's all about?
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|