![]() I suppose Picolay might even work on Linux through Wine.Do you have any facts or proof for your questionable statement?The reason is that as you grow and expand as a photographer you never know the things you are usually trying to accomplish. In the past I have even written to his German software developer and he explained that his software (Picolay) is mainly useful for microscope pictures. with little cars) but its stacking of insects were not generally as good as its commercial alternatives (Zerene and Helicon focus). On Windows 10, I also tested Picolay (freeware) with images similar to the ones posted on this thread (e.g. Generally I shoot my images at 2:1 magnification. ![]() Usually I stack 300-400 images taken with a Nikon D850, mounted on a tripod, with a Laowa lens (100mm f/2.8 2x Ultra-Macro 2:1). It would be interesting to test these softwares with some stacking of insects where you have many little hairs to stacks.Īt present, I am working with Zerene stacker (it works also on Linux) because I was not satisfied as regards the open source alternatives.ĭo not get me wrong : they were pretty good with “easy” stacking like coins, little statues etc but, as far as I am concerned, the results I got with insects were generally bad. But as I said, anything with a modern approach is more than welcomed.įor comparison, here’s enfuse stacking with no mask: Its output also has less contrast/saturation/details than enfuse. In term of stacking quality, focus-stack is able to address halo somewhat, but still has faint ghosting in the bigger radius. So tempting to rename the current “Stack” tab to “Focus Stack”, and add another tab “Median Stack” I did a few manually before, and the workflow is very similar to focus stacking. I’ll probably contact the author to see if s/he can expose more options, such as the number of iterations, eps, …, and having a stack-only mode.Īnother possibility is median-stacking. Now that I started adding different tools into my little script, I’d love to add focus-stack as another option for alignment (since it’s faster and more efficient than Python implementation). I tested using all 16 cores on my Ryzen 5700H, and 32GB memory quickly got flooded into swap I’d say 4-8 processes is safe for 24MP images, not too bad for a Python implementation. Took a few hours to learn how to use multiprocesssing.Pool, I pick the middle image as anchor and align the rest against it. ![]() Thus, currently I only have it in my workflow at the final export step. But it’s a time-consuming algorithm, thus, would not work well with the real-time interaction nature of darktable. For example, I found ImageMagick’s deblur_richardsonlucy currently has the best sharpening/noise ratio comparing to all the tools built in darktable (diffuse/sharpening, contrast equalizer, …), especially at ISO1600 and above. There’re so many tools that can be added to darktable, but they perhaps don’t fit into darktable workflow. On the other hand, all the changes I wanted to implement in MacroFusion are a little too much that would divert it in a totally new direction: piping output from console, removing preview feature (since the alignment works differently at different resolutions), and implementing masks (I really like how Hugin did it). But it’s indeed a pity that da-phil and I weren’t aware of each other’s effort. Haha, back in 2018 I dabbed my toe into Python, basically was just “hacking” at the existing MacroFusion code, definitely not confident enough to contribute officially, it was just a short burst and I stopped messing with it. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |