Please help with landscape focus stacking

Long story short, in another thread I asked advise on a pic to print, I have a window in the very close foreground and a rock in the middle of the ocean in the background, focused on the window (two points) and the rock, had a long enough shutter speed as to have silky water, compensating the focus breathing works well, problem arises when the software (either PShop or Helicon...) has to stack the water which renders ugly.

Wondering how to work with masks and do it manually, I need the first two shots of the stack for the foreground window frame and the third one for the water and rock, if I manually add a layer mask how do I avoid the halos around the edges of the different layers?

Grazie

If your window exposures are in focus, how much better are they going to get stacked?

Does the rock get better stacked?

Would it be worth manually compositing the shot? Base layer = window. Next layer = manually cut rock from stacked result. Final layer = long exposure of single ocean.

All of which ought to be able to layer over your base layer without showing any halo's.

grsnovi said:

If your window exposures are in focus, how much better are they going to get stacked?

Does the rock get better stacked?

Would it be worth manually compositing the shot? Base layer = window. Next layer = manually cut rock from stacked result. Final layer = long exposure of single ocean.

All of which ought to be able to layer over your base layer without showing any halo's.

Click to expand...

I am attaching the photographs here so you can tell yourself about it and my answer to your question is definitely yes, it would not just worth but unique way I think to manually compositing as the software can't menage water motion.















--
Giovanni - 70% GAS affected
Nikon D850 - Nikon D800 - Nikon D2Xs - Fuji S5Pro - Nikon F - Nikon F3
J.A. Michell Gyrodec - Audio Research SP-9 - Aeron AP-890 - JBL4311B - JBL L220
JN70CN - 14.14.30E 40.32.40N

I don't have time at the moment but here is what I suggest:

Top image = base. Lighten shadows of wall only above window. Keep sky.

Middle image = extract rock to use over rock in top image.

Bottom image = extract water to use over water in top image.

Merge/flatten composited layers.

grsnovi said:

I don't have time at the moment but here is what I suggest:

Top image = base. Lighten shadows of wall only above window. Keep sky.

Middle image = extract rock to use over rock in top image.

Bottom image = extract water to use over water in top image.

Merge/flatten composited layers.

Click to expand...

Hello,

once I get onto my stack I know which photo has the closest corner (left one) in focus (or almost), then the one with the right hand side in focus then the background rock, water and sky.

What I try to do is stack them into layers and first thing first align and fix focus breathing, once I have the three of them matching in size my guess is that I have to make for each f them a layer mask and then I am lost, dunno how to proceed, paint white/black to hide/reveal, correct?

Hello Giovanni,

I started to "play" with copies of the three jpg's you posted above and I wonder:

• how many images you shot originally
• how many did you shoot at each focus
• how many did you stack to obtain each
• what other post processing you might have attempted

I ask because I am already seeing halo's in your posted jpg's.

I thought that the top image was "the best" focus on the rock window detail but I wasn't able to do much with the shadows - it would be better to work with the original raw's.

I also thought that I'd be able to do simple cut/paste operations between the other images to obtain the best focus on the distant rock as well as the smoothest sea however despite the fact that all three images are the same size externally, the internal detail doesn't map 1-to-1.

I can't cut the sea/rock and paste it into the "opening" without ending up with a mis-match.

So, while I do see differences in sharpness of focus, I think the best way to get what you're hoping for would be to work with original raw images untouched by your stacking software and composite the best focused pieces together.

I'm not prepared to spend all afternoon painting individual pixels to remove the halo's introduced by your s/w's stacking.

Just my opinion. I'm sure the masters of this forum (Major Jack Reacher, Babine, etc...) would be able to do better than I can but all would want to start with unprocessed raw files.

grsnovi said:

Hello Giovanni,

I started to "play" with copies of the three jpg's you posted above and I wonder:

• how many images you shot originally

Click to expand...

Three sets one for each focus point

grsnovi said:

• how many did you shoot at each focus

Click to expand...

I usually take three shots 1 stop apart from each other

grsnovi said:

• how many did you stack to obtain each

Click to expand...

Three for each focus point

grsnovi said:

• what other post processing you might have attempted

Click to expand...

I did basic adjustment in LR like cropping (as to avoid frame of the polariser), sharpening mask, lens correction

grsnovi said:

I ask because I am already seeing halo's in your posted jpg's.

Click to expand...

Well, once one does an exposure stack, call it HDR or whatever, on a long exposure with water my guess is that it can't be avoided so, probably, the idea I have of this shot fails from the start, I can't simply get it.

grsnovi said:

I thought that the top image was "the best" focus on the rock window detail but I wasn't able to do much with the shadows - it would be better to work with the original raw's.

I also thought that I'd be able to do simple cut/paste operations between the other images to obtain the best focus on the distant rock as well as the smoothest sea however despite the fact that all three images are the same size externally, the internal detail doesn't map 1-to-1.

I can't cut the sea/rock and paste it into the "opening" without ending up with a mis-match.

So, while I do see differences in sharpness of focus, I think the best way to get what you're hoping for would be to work with original raw images untouched by your stacking software and composite the best focused pieces together.

I'm not prepared to spend all afternoon painting individual pixels to remove the halo's introduced by your s/w's stacking.

Just my opinion. I'm sure the masters of this forum (Major Jack Reacher, Babine, etc...) would be able to do better than I can but all would want to start with unprocessed raw files.

Click to expand...

I of course have the raw files, as I wrote above probably the kind of image I want to take can't be achieved, either I try when the sea is already smooth on its own as to avoid the holos or give up the idea.

Maybe stack only two shots and forget about exposure stacking to keep things the simplest, I was thinking to add a GND on the bottom (the bottom part of the frame is always much brighter than the top because of light coming through other openings) to balance inside light and then only take a shot on the right side of the frame and one for the distant rock and try that way, here two single shots but no GND.




Focus not really accurate but somewhere around the frame









--
Giovanni - 70% GAS affected
Nikon D850 - Nikon D800 - Nikon D2Xs - Fuji S5Pro - Nikon F - Nikon F3
J.A. Michell Gyrodec - Audio Research SP-9 - Aeron AP-890 - JBL4311B - JBL L220
JN70CN - 14.14.30E 40.32.40N

Giovanni_1968 said:

grsnovi said:

Hello Giovanni,

I started to "play" with copies of the three jpg's you posted above and I wonder:

• how many images you shot originally

Click to expand...

Three sets one for each focus point

Giovanni_1968 said:

• how many did you shoot at each focus

Click to expand...

I usually take three shots 1 stop apart from each other

Giovanni_1968 said:

• how many did you stack to obtain each

Click to expand...

Three for each focus point

Giovanni_1968 said:

• what other post processing you might have attempted

Click to expand...

I did basic adjustment in LR like cropping (as to avoid frame of the polariser), sharpening mask, lens correction

Giovanni_1968 said:

I ask because I am already seeing halo's in your posted jpg's.

Click to expand...

Well, once one does an exposure stack, call it HDR or whatever, on a long exposure with water my guess is that it can't be avoided so, probably, the idea I have of this shot fails from the start, I can't simply get it.

Giovanni_1968 said:

I thought that the top image was "the best" focus on the rock window detail but I wasn't able to do much with the shadows - it would be better to work with the original raw's.

I also thought that I'd be able to do simple cut/paste operations between the other images to obtain the best focus on the distant rock as well as the smoothest sea however despite the fact that all three images are the same size externally, the internal detail doesn't map 1-to-1.

I can't cut the sea/rock and paste it into the "opening" without ending up with a mis-match.

So, while I do see differences in sharpness of focus, I think the best way to get what you're hoping for would be to work with original raw images untouched by your stacking software and composite the best focused pieces together.

I'm not prepared to spend all afternoon painting individual pixels to remove the halo's introduced by your s/w's stacking.

Just my opinion. I'm sure the masters of this forum (Major Jack Reacher, Babine, etc...) would be able to do better than I can but all would want to start with unprocessed raw files.

Click to expand...

I of course have the raw files, as I wrote above probably the kind of image I want to take can't be achieved, either I try when the sea is already smooth on its own as to avoid the holos or give up the idea.

Maybe stack only two shots and forget about exposure stacking to keep things the simplest, I was thinking to add a GND on the bottom (the bottom part of the frame is always much brighter than the top because of light coming through other openings) to balance inside light and then only take a shot on the right side of the frame and one for the distant rock and try that way, here two single shots but no GND.


Focus not really accurate but somewhere around the frame

Click to expand...

IMHO - a way to do this is with a Big Stopper - a 6 - 10 stop ND to get the water the silkiest at 20 mm an F 13 everything beyond 1.5 m is in focus so there is no need to focus stack.

If the dynamic range of the rocks is problematic - do 1 set of shots for the rocks with or without the ND filter - the big fish is the extended water motion and the Big Stopper is the best tool. The more cloud cover and the more wind to splash water highest up on the rocks - the better.

Go to F 16 - sharpness shouldn't be an issue and you get longer exposure times- since the rock is static - the water dynamic - maybe you want to fill more of the frame with the water and decrease the rock frame size.

It's a great idea - keep tweaking it.

You can get rid of halos with color filters in Photoshop or NIK Color FX Pro, or a " reverse photo filter" in PS by choosing Photo Filter and reversing the color values

If you have a pen tool - one can sample the colors on either side of the halo - make layers below it of those colors and brush in a bridge.

The blur tool is very useful to touch up.

Easy Peasy

--
Best Regards, Rodger
Save Lives - Be an Organ or Stem Cell Donor.
Quaecumque vera

Here's my version:


Auto-align layers to compensate for the focus breathing. Then I simply used the Quick Selection Tool to grab and delete the foreground rocks. Some tweaks to brightness/colour/etc. Selectively darkened the foreground rocks. Cropped somewhat as I felt the framing rocks were too dominant. This is only two images though.

FWIW I wouldn't get too hung up on everything being razor sharp from front to back, remember if we're looking at a scene with near and far objects, usually the area we're not focussing on will be slightly OOF - just like the camera, our eyes don't have unlimited depth of field. In many ways a perfectly sharp shot from front to back looks a bit unnatural IMO.

Giovanni_1968 said:

I am attaching the photographs here so you can tell yourself about it and my answer to your question is definitely yes, it would not just worth but unique way I think to manually compositing as the software can't menage water motion.

Click to expand...

The problem with this composition is that the camera's position is forced, if I get further as to avoid focus breathing and achieve deeper field the perspective changes, other issue being that by already stacking the different exposures on the same focal point the water motion creates a mess on the stacked image, then stack 2 or 3 different ones and it becomes a nightmare.

Solution might be to reduce the captures to two focal planes, right hand side and background rock and try and achieve it without to stack exposures, then either very rough seas (which might happen on the weekend) or very smooth as to avoid artefacts.

Stay tuned and thank you for your suggestions