# Focus Stacking: Camaro Edition



## qmr55 (Jul 24, 2017)

So I just attempted focus stacking for the first time, more or less because I wanted to teach myself how to do it in Photoshop.  Don't mind my "studio" setup, as it was a couple back t shirts and some led lights with home made diffusers.    I think I missed the focus on the rear of the car a little bit

Comments and critique is always welcome!




Focus Stacking Camaro 1 by Sam LaMothe, on Flickr


----------



## qmr55 (Jul 24, 2017)

Side note: its 22 images stacked


----------



## FotosbyMike (Jul 25, 2017)

Focus stacking is fun, but yeah focus was missed in the rear of the car. I can't say it was missed by you or the camera or PhotoShop hard to say. Also I can't say if another image would have fix it either, there are a ton a variables with focus stacking; focal length, aperture, distance from the focus plan, focus ring throw (the circular travel distance of the focus ring), subject angle...etc.

Some pointers, place a piece of tape around the focus ring then focus on the nearest point of the car and make a mark from the lens barrel mark to the tape, then focus past the farthest point of the car and mark from the lens barrel to the tape. This is the total distance needed to have the whole car in focus and from there you can take all the images you need. 

Next PS does an OK job at FS but if you really want get into it check out Helicon Focus software it is pretty cheap for what you get and it does 100X better the PS at FS. 

Good luck and keep shooting.


----------



## qmr55 (Jul 25, 2017)

FotosbyMike said:


> Focus stacking is fun, but yeah focus was missed in the rear of the car. I can't say it was missed by you or the camera or PhotoShop hard to say. Also I can't say if another image would have fix it either, there are a ton a variables with focus stacking; focal length, aperture, distance from the focus plan, focus ring throw (the circular travel distance of the focus ring), subject angle...etc.
> 
> Some pointers, place a piece of tape around the focus ring then focus on the nearest point of the car and make a mark from the lens barrel mark to the tape, then focus past the farthest point of the car and mark from the lens barrel to the tape. This is the total distance needed to have the whole car in focus and from there you can take all the images you need.
> 
> ...



That's an awesome idea, thanks! I will definitely use that.

Question, for  a shot like this since I'm stacking and light was relatively limited, should I be shooting at a smaller or larger aperture?  I took all these at 1.8 and shorter shutter times (I think they were 3 sec each, but I don't have it in front of me to check right now) or should I be shooting at say 7-9 and a  longer shutter speed?

Its a 50mm prime lens.  Should I expect sharper images when stacking at a smaller or larger aperture?  

Also, cool I will check out Helicon, because I definitely have an interest in stacking.


----------



## SCraig (Jul 25, 2017)

That's a pretty cool Camaro   I saw [a real] one very similar at a drag race last year; big monster engine with a blower and injector sticking up just like that.  I told the guy that owned it, "That's what everybody that owns a Camaro THINKS theirs looks like."  He folded up laughing.


----------



## smoke665 (Jul 25, 2017)

You might already have this but if not then a focus rail will really help. I've got a cheap one similar to this Amazon.com: SHOOT 4 Way Macro Focusing Rail Slider for Canon Sony Pentax Nikon Olympus Samsung and All Digtal Camera with 1/4" Screw Hole for Close-up Shooting: Cell Phones & Accessories 

It works pretty well, but if I did a lot of these, I spend the money on a better one, because stability between the shots is important.


----------



## qmr55 (Jul 25, 2017)

SCraig said:


> That's a pretty cool Camaro   I saw [a real] one very similar at a drag race last year; big monster engine with a blower and injector sticking up just like that.  I told the guy that owned it, "That's what everybody that owns a Camaro THINKS theirs looks like."  He folded up laughing.



That's awesome! It's my favorite car and also my favorite color combo (yellow with the black rally stripes).  I probably have 10-15 models of this around the house somewhere.



smoke665 said:


> You might already have this but if not then a focus rail will really help. I've got a cheap one similar to this Amazon.com: SHOOT 4 Way Macro Focusing Rail Slider for Canon Sony Pentax Nikon Olympus Samsung and All Digtal Camera with 1/4" Screw Hole for Close-up Shooting: Cell Phones & Accessories
> 
> It works pretty well, but if I did a lot of these, I spend the money on a better one, because stability between the shots is important.



I've been looking into getting one.  I might start out with a cheaper model like you linked and see how much it helps!  The shot I did was just me adjusting the focus ring between every shot.


----------



## FotosbyMike (Jul 25, 2017)

qmr55 said:


> Question, for a shot like this since I'm stacking and light was relatively limited, should I be shooting at a smaller or larger aperture? I took all these at 1.8 and shorter shutter times (I think they were 3 sec each, but I don't have it in front of me to check right now) or should I be shooting at say 7-9 and a longer shutter speed?



Most lenses sweet spot is no where near the max aperture(1.8), it is closer to F9-F14 (depends on the lens) this should give you the sharpest image. But increasing your aperture limits the amount of light coming into the camera decreasing your shutter speeds which can create movement.  I would buy brighter bulbs, I know Lowe's sells 100watt+ equivalent CFLs which is only like ~20watts so it is still safe to put in any normal light fixture. Other benefits of increasing your aperture is keeping the off plane items in focus this is because the car is not perpendicular with the focus plane it is in the 45 degree range. This is also lower the needed photos in the stack.


----------



## SCraig (Jul 25, 2017)

qmr55 said:


> That's awesome! It's my favorite car and also my favorite color combo (yellow with the black rally stripes).  I probably have 10-15 models of this around the house somewhere.


I've owned 4 of them, I think, starting with a 1968 Z28.  Always had a fondness for them myself.

This is the one I mentioned.  Sorry, it's blue but it does have the rally stripes


----------



## smoke665 (Jul 25, 2017)

Your DOF is actually a function of aperture, lens focal length, and distance to the subject. In your image if you are at 12" from the subject with a 50mm lens, and f/1.8, your total DOF would only be 8/10". Even with 22 shots that's pretty slim. Adjusting the aperture to f/8.0 with the same set up would give you a total DOF of 3/8", which at 22 shots is going to work much better. 

I use this online calculator a lot. Online Depth of Field Calculator 

Another comment, in addition to increasing the amount of light, increasing you ISO is another option. You could easily increase it to 400 without a lot of noise issues.


----------



## qmr55 (Jul 25, 2017)

FotosbyMike said:


> qmr55 said:
> 
> 
> > Question, for a shot like this since I'm stacking and light was relatively limited, should I be shooting at a smaller or larger aperture? I took all these at 1.8 and shorter shutter times (I think they were 3 sec each, but I don't have it in front of me to check right now) or should I be shooting at say 7-9 and a longer shutter speed?
> ...



Ok cool I will try again tonight and shoot everything around F9-14, and when I get a chance I'll swing over to Lowes and pick up some brighter bulbs.  I was testing shooting at F16 for a single exposure and I was somewhere around 25-30 seconds but I was definitely getting a little movement.

I will play around again tonight.  Thanks for the tips.



SCraig said:


> qmr55 said:
> 
> 
> > That's awesome! It's my favorite car and also my favorite color combo (yellow with the black rally stripes).  I probably have 10-15 models of this around the house somewhere.
> ...



That's freakin' sweet! Blue is #3 on my list only behind orange and yellow.  I've only owned one later gen 81 z28 but my next project is a 68 RS.  I'm excited.



smoke665 said:


> Your DOF is actually a function of aperture, lens focal length, and distance to the subject. In your image if you are at 12" from the subject with a 50mm lens, and f/1.8, your total DOF would only be 8/10". Even with 22 shots that's pretty slim. Adjusting the aperture to f/8.0 with the same set up would give you a total DOF of 3/8", which at 22 shots is going to work much better.
> 
> I use this online calculator a lot. Online Depth of Field Calculator
> 
> Another comment, in addition to increasing the amount of light, increasing you ISO is another option. You could easily increase it to 400 without a lot of noise issues.



That's great, I will use that tool for future references.  As for the ISO, I did try bumping it up to 400 or 600, I forget exactly, but the background started to show a lot of specs and spots so I tried keeping it down to 100.

Granted, I don't have a proper studio setup and I had t shirts laying on a clothes basket with two pieces of wood behind it and a t shirt draped over that as a backdrop.  Do what I can with what I have for now lol.

Thanks for all the tips everyone!


----------



## qmr55 (Jul 25, 2017)

Any comments on the lighting?  I was bouncing 3 lights, one of ceiling, one off left wall and one off right wall.  With home made diffusers on all 3 of them (tissue paper stretched over foam core with a hole cut in it.)


----------



## smoke665 (Jul 25, 2017)

qmr55 said:


> I forget exactly, but the background started to show a lot of specs and spots so I tried keeping it down to 100.



Either move your background further back,  or in PS open a new 50% gray layer, then use the burn tool to darken the background, or in PS use a curves layer and levels layer to adjust.


----------



## smoke665 (Jul 25, 2017)

qmr55 said:


> I was bouncing 3 lights, one of ceiling, one off left wall and one off right wall.



With the light limited as it is, I think I'd either pull off the modifiers and just bounce the light, or use the modifiers but don't bounce them.

Looking at the image more, it lacks contrast. Contrast will give the appearance of sharpness even if it is a little soft on focus. This is a quick edit in PS doing what I told you above. You also need to adjust the WB on the original, to match the lights you're using.


----------



## qmr55 (Jul 25, 2017)

smoke665 said:


> qmr55 said:
> 
> 
> > I was bouncing 3 lights, one of ceiling, one off left wall and one off right wall.
> ...



I will have to try tonight without the modifiers and see what kind of difference it makes.

Funny you say/do that with the background, as I originally did exactly that and made it stand on a black solid background but I actually thought it lacked something then so I brought it back to the original and just darkened the background up a tad.  I don't know maybe its just personal artistic preference but I think the one with a solid black is "lacking" something.  Hard to explain lol.  Thanks though!


----------



## smoke665 (Jul 25, 2017)

qmr55 said:


> as I originally did exactly that and made it stand on a black solid background but I actually thought it lacked something then so I brought it back to the original and just darkened the background up a tad. I don't know maybe its just personal artistic preference but I think the one with a solid black is "lacking" something. Hard to explain lol.



One thing you might try is using plexiglass with black foam core underneath for the base. Gives you some nice reflections. Or go crazy with your image in HDR format. Lot's of possibilities. Look forward to seeing more from you.


----------



## qmr55 (Jul 25, 2017)

smoke665 said:


> qmr55 said:
> 
> 
> > as I originally did exactly that and made it stand on a black solid background but I actually thought it lacked something then so I brought it back to the original and just darkened the background up a tad. I don't know maybe its just personal artistic preference but I think the one with a solid black is "lacking" something. Hard to explain lol.
> ...



Oooooh I like the idea of the plexiglass and black foam core. Gonna have to try that!


----------



## qmr55 (Jul 26, 2017)

So I started playing with some black foam core and some plexiglass.  I'm not sure what I'm doing wrong but almost every shot is coming out with the foam core being a muddle black almost a gray/brown instead of a nice crisp black.

Any tips?  Am I doing something wrong with lighting?  I was bouncing light off the ceiling and left and right.  The brighter I made the light the worse it got, and the longer I exposed the worse it got....


----------



## qmr55 (Jul 26, 2017)

Hmmmmmmm


----------



## FotosbyMike (Jul 27, 2017)

The reason why the back foam core is not black is because the light is spilling onto the back ground. 
Fix - 1. more the background further away from the light source
2. Flag the light source (block so it doesn't spill)
3. Fix it in post by increasing the black on the background


----------



## qmr55 (Jul 27, 2017)

Thanks Mime! I actually used number 3 on my last attached image and I like the results!


----------



## smoke665 (Jul 27, 2017)

qmr55 said:


> Hmmmmmmm



The last one is much better. A few comments.

On my monitor and tablet the car has a lot of green in the yellow. Is the original that color? Also, are you on manual, or Auto? My advice would be to set your camera to full manual, and at the start of each series of shots use a small piece of white Styrofoam as a target. Then set the color temperature of all the shots in that series to the white. LR is the easiest because you can use the eye dropper then synch all. You can also use the eye dropper in levels in PS, but it's a little more difficult to adjust all. If your WB is off it can affect all colors including the black.
22 shots is a lot to manage. As the number goes up the potential for alignment errors also rises. You can see that in the trunk and rear spoiler. I would suggest dropping the number of shots, and raising the aperture to give more ovetlap in the DOF or invest in a decent focus rail.
Not sure that all that light bouncing off walls is helping you. Softer light being counter to the sharpness you seek to gain by stacking. Direct light with modifiers as necessary would give you greater control on contrast.


----------



## qmr55 (Jul 27, 2017)

Hey Smoke,


I don't see the green in the color, although I am a tad color blind so that could be part of the problem lol.  I was shooting in aperture priority on these shots.  I will give it a try with the white styrofoam.  Would white foamcore do the same?  I have that already.  I will have to play with LR as I usually use PS to process, so that will be new to me.
Agreed, I actually used less shot son the last one.  I will have to mess with the lighting some more to be able to shoot at a higher aperture.  I am planning to fool around with the setup this weekend some more to learn some.
On your last point, I must have read your mind because on that last shot I used one light pointed directly at the front right of the car with a diffuser on it.
Thanks again for all the help, much appreciated and I have more to experiment with now!


----------



## smoke665 (Jul 28, 2017)

qmr55 said:


> I don't see the green in the color, although I am a tad color blind so that could be part of the problem



If you're working on an uncalibrated monitor, that could be part of the problem. Mine was way off. This is a relatively inexpensive solution I use to calibrate about once a month ColorMunki Smile - Easy-to-Use Monitor Calibration: X-Rite Photo & Video.



qmr55 said:


> I was shooting in aperture priority on these shots.



Remember that DOF is a function of lens focal length, *aperture*, and distance from the subject. Though it probably isn't changing the aperture, during the shot series, it most definitely could pick a less than suitable aperture. For example with your setup at f/2.8 and a distance to subject of 12" your total DOF is less than 1/8", but more importantly you only have less than 1/16" in front of or behind your focus point that will be in focus. Up your aperture to f/8.0 and you triple your total DOF to almost 3/8", with approximately 3/16" in front of and behind your focus point. The significance being that it increases your ability to miss your focus point and still retain a sharp focus. There is a point where increases in aperture won't necessarily reflect an increase in sharpness, each lens has a "sweet spot" for maximum sharpness.



qmr55 said:


> Would white foamcore do the same? I have that already.



Yup, as will anything white - IE: Styrofoam plates, white paper, etc. though ideally an 18% gray target is the best for color, but white will get you close.



qmr55 said:


> I will have to mess with the lighting some more to be able to shoot at a higher aperture.



Don't forget you can also use ISO. With your light set up ISO 100 is pretty low. You could probably safely go to 400 without any objectionable noise, maybe higher. If there was it's easy to clean up in LR.


----------



## FotosbyMike (Jul 28, 2017)

Since you are using PS I would highly recommend getting some practice in with the Pen tool for cutting object out of the backgrounds creating a layer mask so when you make your adjustments to the back black you don't affect the cars exposure.

On the last images it looks like the WB maybe a little off, also I would fix the rear rim is blueish and the front rim is more yellow. Need some more exposure in the blower so we can see the butterflies, needs more light on the front bumper too. 

Can't wait to see what you pull off this weekend.


----------

