What do you think about this photo?Do you have questions or curiosities about this image? Do you want to ask something to the author, give him suggestions for improvement, or congratulate for a photo that you really like?
You can do it by joining JuzaPhoto, it is easy and free!
There is more: by registering you can create your personal page, publish photos, receive comments and you can use all the features of JuzaPhoto. With more than 252000 members, there is space for everyone, from the beginner to the professional.
| sent on April 16, 2023 (14:00) | This comment has been automatically translated (show/hide original)
Truly remarkable. An explanation for the existence of flies :-D Davvero notevole. Una spiegazione all'esistenza delle mosche |
| sent on April 16, 2023 (17:35) | This comment has been automatically translated (show/hide original)
He was motionless yet quite awake because he ruined a couple of stacking by moving my head slightly. With advances of 0.03 mm we proceed slowly and I do not know how necessary it is. It depends on the subject, I guess. I have to do some tests by stacking the same at 0.03, 0.05 and maybe 0.10 mm and see if the result changes perceptibly. Era immobile eppure abbastanza sveglio perché mi ha rovinato un paio di stacking spostando leggermente la testa. Con avanzamenti di 0,03 mm si procede lentamente e non so quanto sia necessario. Dipende dal soggetto, immagino. Devo fare delle prove eseguendo lo stesso stacking a 0,03, 0,05 e magari 0,10 mm e vedere se il risultato cambia in maniera percettibile. |
| sent on April 16, 2023 (17:50) | This comment has been automatically translated (show/hide original)
But you could not delete one shot out of two from the f.s. posted? You would be stacked at 0.06... Ma non potresti eliminare uno scatto su due dal f.s. postato? Ti verrebbe uno stacking a 0,06... |
| sent on April 16, 2023 (17:52) | This comment has been automatically translated (show/hide original)
Already! :-or Now I'll try. :-) Già! Ora ci provo. |
| sent on April 16, 2023 (18:29) | This comment has been automatically translated (show/hide original)
The answer: between advances of 0.03 mm and 0.06 mm there is almost no difference. The almost refers to some parts of the background that are better in stacking with a greater number of shots but it is trivial stuff. Going up to 0.12 mm makes noticeable parts of the subject less detailed. For example the ommatidia, some hairs and still the background. Il responso: tra avanzamenti di 0,03 mm e 0,06 mm non vi è quasi differenza. Il quasi è riferito ad alcune parti dello sfondo che risultano migliori nello stacking con un maggior numero di scatti ma è roba di poco conto. Salendo a 0,12 mm si fanno evidenti parti del soggetto meno dettagliate. Ad esempio gli ommatidi, alcuni peli e ancora lo sfondo. |
| sent on April 16, 2023 (18:53) | This comment has been automatically translated (show/hide original)
I mark it! :-) Me lo segno! |
| sent on April 16, 2023 (19:52) | This comment has been automatically translated (show/hide original)
In the next stacking in which I will use high RR (3-5x) I think I will advance by 0.05 mm while between 3x and 2x I will go up to 0.10 mm for the simple fact that turning it is more comfortable to stop on the long cleats of the graduated drum. ^_^ In any case, in order not to have artifacts, the difference is always made by the right number of advances, the position of the subject and what is or is not in front of and behind it. Nei prossimi stacking in cui userò RR alti (3-5x) penso che avanzerò di 0,05 mm mentre tra 3x e 2x salirò a 0,10 mm per il semplice fatto che girando è più comodo fermarsi sulle tacchette lunghe del tamburo graduato. ^_^ In ogni caso, per non avere artefatti, la differenza la fanno sempre il giusto numero di avanzamenti, la posizione del soggetto e cosa c'è o non c'è davanti e dietro ad esso.. |
|

Publish your advertisement on JuzaPhoto (info) |