![]() Most of my stacks are deep and I make stereo from almost everything, so for me the choice is simple in favor of ZS. ![]() Both programs can generate 3D stereo pairs from a single stack, but the approaches are very different so that the ZS result is much more accurate with difficult geometries such as bristly bugs. Zerene Stacker adds a feature called "slabbing", which facilitates retouching with deep stacks ("deep" = lots of source images). Helicon Focus does all of what many people care about, and it runs very fast. The choice of Zerene Stacker versus Helicon Focus depends on what you care about. This approach runs very fast, partly because it skips most of the raw conversion work for the source images, and partly because HF in general is much faster than Zerene Stacker. Then HF stacks the RGB TIFF images and finally packages the resulting image into a DNG wrapper so that it can be color-adjusted exactly as if it were an original raw image. In the background, HF does minimal processing to convert the raw images to 16-bit TIFF with RGB at each pixel position ("demosaiced") but otherwise with no adjustments. In this case the stacking program (HF) is fed unprocessed raw images. Helicon Focus allows another option, which they call Raw-In-DNG-out. This approach is relatively slow because the raw-to-TIFF conversion step does a lot of work on every image separately, but I think it makes the best final output. As part of adjusting the image, I also tune noise reduction and sharpening so as to provide the stacking program with images that let it make the best decisions. So I do what you suggest: using Lightroom, I adjust one image, synchronize those settings to the other images, then export to 16-bit TIFF to feed into the stacking program. I prefer to feed the stacking program with images that are close to what I finally want to see in the end. Zerene Stacker goes the other route, exposing the conversion process and encouraging users to deal with it as what we think it really is: a key part of the overall workflow that deserves some attention in order to get best results.Different people have different approaches. ![]() Some stacking software from other companies deals with this aspect by accepting raw files at the level of the user interface, then converting them to some RGB format, typically TIFF, in a background process that is easy to overlook and may be difficult to optimize. The structure of data in a typical raw image file, one value per photosite with color implied by a mosaic Bayer filter pattern, is fundamentally incompatible with the image alignment process that is required for stacking. See Working with Lightroom for more details about this "Pro-only" feature.Ī longer explanation is that no stacking software really works directly with raw files. When using Lightroom with the plugin, processing raw files is just a matter of selecting them and doing an Export to Zerene Stacker. If you use Lightroom, then be aware that there's a Lightroom plugin for Zerene Stacker that handles raw conversion automatically. You can download those separately, or use software provided by your camera manufacturer. Zerene Systems does not provide raw converters. After stacking the 16-bit TIFFs, tell Zerene Stacker to save its output also as 16-bit TIFF.īecause 16-bit TIFF files are lossless and have more bits per pixel than are captured by current cameras, this process retains all of the image quality intrinsic to the raw formats. First you convert the raw files to some standard RGB format, typically TIFF, and then you stack the TIFF files.įor highest quality, we recommend converting raw files to 16-bit TIFF using your favorite raw converter and whatever settings make it work the best. To process any format of raw files, including DNG, takes two separate steps. The long answer to your question shown below is from their website's FAQ. It depends on what you mean by the term, support.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |