‘I find Lightroom CC incredibly convenient for several reasons. Why Alex Pansier likes using Lightroom to edit close-up and macro photography: Lightroom is aimed purely at photographers, whereas Photoshop is used across other creative disciplines, such as graphic design. Professional photographers often use a combination of Lightroom (for their day-to-day workflows) and Photoshop (for detailed editing work). Some photographers use it for editing, but its main purpose is to help you make catalogues of images for specific projects. Send email to if you want more information.Combining image management with non-destructive editing, Lightroom is an intuitive program that excels at organising, managing and locating files. In that case a better estimate would be provided by a conventional DOF calculator, using COC set to approximately twice the pixel pitch. If you need to operate far to the left of the bold section, say to get particularly soft bokeh, then the step sizes listed here will be unnecessarily small because resolution will be limited by the camera sensor and not the optics. Roughly speaking, this corresponds to no loss of fine detail and no more than 26% reduction of MTF at any spatial frequency. The math underlying these tables makes assumptions that are reasonable for most lenses, then proceeds using a math formulation that is based on wave optics and guarantees no more than 1/4-lambda wavefront error for green light at the worst focus distances. Once you've chosen the aperture setting, then using the numbers in these tables will guarantee that you won't see “focus banding” no matter how good a camera or lens you're using, or how closely you choose to look at the captured images. That's because COC is essentially bundled into your choice of aperture. Notes: You may be surprised that there's nothing in these tables about circle of confusion (COC), like you'd find in most DOF tables. Numbers in the above table can be closely reproduced by the simplified formula DOF = 0.00055/(NA*NA). Table 2-C – Determine DOF (step size) from Numerical Aperture (NA) In this case, step size is estimated entirely from the NA rating (Numerical Aperture) of the objective. This final Table 2-C is for users of microscope objectives. Table for new Nikon twist-to-focus lenses, add-on closeup lenses, and combos by effective apertureĮffective aperture = f-number shown on camera (Four-Thirds, APS-C, Full-Frame)ĭOF = (0.0022*N*N)/(m*m), where N is the F-number and m is magnification.Įxample: F-number 5.6 and magnification 0.50 computes as DOF = (0.0022*5.6*5.6)/(0.50*0.50) = 0.2760. The following Table 2-B is for users who fit any of the following profiles: Nominal f-number (Four-Thirds, APS-C, Full-Frame) Table for most twist-to-focus lenses, bellows or extension tubes Using these tables is essentially a three-step process with no experimentation: That's what the tables on this page are for. However, if you're starting from scratch or doing a new type of stack, then surely you could use some guidance about what settings would be reasonable to start with. This table will be significantly different for different people. Take notes about what you find and you will quickly develop a table of settings and step sizes that are optimized for your own equipment, your own applications, and your own preferences. Compare result images to find the largest N that does not give focus banding, then multiply the actual step size by N to find the optimum step size. A good way to do this is by shooting a single stack with a step size that is much smaller than you need, then processing the stack multiple times while changing the setting of Options > Preferences > Preprocessing > “Stack every N'th frame” to 1, 2, 3, 4, etc. At that magnification and aperture setting, determine the largest step size that does not give visible focus banding.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |