I'm not into insect photography yet, field or studio. I'll leave that to you "experts"!
The sarcasm is not helpful.
No sarcasm intended, I'm stating you and others are "experts". I'm certainly not, and stated such!!
However, I think I can mention things like the relationship between DoF, magnification and lens aperture, since I must deal with this at the precise levels necessary for semiconductor chip images. This is exactly what I did, mention that at 5X with a lens aperture of f11 this was an effective f66.....which won't produce a very sharp image no matter what.
Of course you can mention it, but as I studied microscopy as a life-sciences undergrad, albeit a long time back I'm well aware of what diffraction is. Likewise after having taken well over 100,000 macro images I've got a pretty good idea what detail looks like at different effective apertures and magnifications.
So you are an "expert", I'm not!! Although, I was a adjunct professor creating and teaching graduate level programs, do hold ~28 patents (3 or 4 pending) and so on. My expertise is more into the scientific/engineering aspect of things, thus my mentioning the 5X and f66 aperture influencing image sharpness, not the artistic aspects of such images. I'm not qualified to critique other's images, only comment on the scientific aspects of such.
Here's an interesting field image captured with stacking that shows some very unique feeding (not exactly the pollinator feeding, but more of one "of" the pollinator as the food). Certainly qualifying as "behavioral photos" I would think. Please follow the thread, some comments are by extremely qualified folks (one has identified multiple new species to his credit)!
https://www.photomacrography.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=36297
The most important point is that everything in that image is still. I'm familiar with that type of scene, and often nothing is moving for seconds. Also it is not as unique as you think. I have seen many photos of Crab Spiders after they have caught a bee or hoverfly, with smaller flies around. By coincidence the first time I saw this type of image (not stacked, it was also from South Africa). I think it is a very good image, and I am not detracting from the image.
Here's your exact quote:
"1) It is impossible to capture behavioural photos with focusing stacking, handheld or otherwise. Good examples of this are feeding pollinators."
I'm not an English major, but as a lay person in insect macro photography that precise statement tells me that capturing behavioral insect photos with focus stacking in the field is impossible! Yet I posted this link.
https://www.photomacrography.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=36297
How is this impossible? It meets your criteria of insect behavior, focus stacking and even hand held!! Certainly looks possible to me, but I couldn't capture that image, I'm sure you and others could though.
This is not an exception to the rule. Often mating insects, will for a period remain absolutely stationary. This is basic stuff known to experienced macro photographs. When using a macro lens on a tripod to keep image quality good using a low ISO, you end up with shutter speeds of a second or more. Therefore what you do is to wait for periods when there is no movement. During these periods you can also focus stack.
Where was there established a "rule". Here's your exact quote again.
"1) It is impossible to capture behavioural photos with focusing stacking, handheld or otherwise. Good examples of this are feeding pollinators."
https://www.photomacrography.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=35623
Seems like a good example of insect behavior to me, maybe rated X :>)
How does this violate your "rule"?
Photographing pollinators feeding is very different. They move around very fast. Watch a bee feeding. You literally have a fraction of a second to grab the shot when the pose and the focus is spot on. There is no way in a million years that you can focus stack such images. I understand that you don't understand this because self-evidently you have never tried to photography a feeding pollinator at high magnification.
And your statement "2) You say "starting to deal with the DoF and effective aperture using stacking in the field" as if this is something recent"
Didn't try to imply that DoF and effective aperture were new, fact is it's purely optical physics based and dates to the beginning on time. Sure one could and probably has image stacked since the beginning of photography I would surmise, but the stacking software today has evolved and now allows very easy stacking without much user intervention. Please review the thread in the first link, it' quite interesting and directly references field stacking with the "new" software.
I use Zerene, but suspect the other specialized stacking software is fully capable of almost automated stacking of field captured images as well.
This is all very confused. You have quoted me quoting you. Yet you say it is my statement. The only part of my statement there was "You say" ... "as if this is something recent". How you get this to me implying you were implying that "DoF and effective aperture were new" I have no idea. No I clearly said you were implying that using focus stacking as a means to tackle this limitation was new. I thought what I said was perfectly clear. I was using Helicon Focus about 12 years ago, and CombineZM/ZP just after. Even back then it was all automated i.e. you just loaded the images, selected the type of stacking you wanted, and pressed go, then just waited for it to stack the images.
Let me explain the problem. You are trying to tell very experienced field macro photographers what is what. No one is telling you how to photograph microchips. I've been taking "insect" macro photographs for well over 30 years. I don't know everything, but it is very funny and not a little ironic when someone with no experience of field insect macro photography starts telling you the basics.
Simple actually, not confusing. Here's my quote.
"Didn't try to imply that DoF and effective aperture were new, fact is it's purely optical physics based and dates to the beginning on time. Sure one could and probably has image stacked since the beginning of photography I would surmise, but the stacking software today has evolved and now allows very easy stacking without much user intervention. Please review the thread in the first link, it' quite interesting and directly references field stacking
https://www.photomacrography.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=36297
These are not my comments, but others that are experts in insect photography like yourself commenting. If you follow the thread it refers to how easy it's become to focus stack in the field with the software like Zerene.
Zerene is constantly being updated and expanded, so this qualifies as "new" to me since it makes the software easier to use, with less user intervention and produces better results.
You state: "Let me explain the problem. You are trying to tell very experienced field macro photographers what is what. No one is telling you how to photograph microchips. I've been taking "insect" macro photographs for well over 30 years. I don't know everything, but it is very funny and not a little ironic when someone with no experience of field insect macro photography starts telling you the basics."
You are an "expert" in the field insect photography, no doubt!! But where have I tried to tell you or anyone anything other than just state a fact that 5X and f66 will reduce image sharpness significantly, and more recently question why field insect photography using focus stacking is impossible?
In chip photography if I was shooting a 5X @ f66, I would thank someone for pointing out the image detrimental effects of such, I would also thank them regardless of their field of "expertise". If I thought some part of stacking was impossible with some set of parameters and someone pointed out that others are doing this, I would also thank them regardless of their field of "expertise", not attack them because they question someone's self proclaimed "rule"!!
Best,
