Affinity Photo Editor for iPad

It seems intriguing to me to hear talk of BIG ipad pro's, Affinity editing, which seems to me to be basically a Photoshop clone, are we are getting away from the simple premise of 'mobile' photography?
Devices that are as powerful, if not more so than a desktop computer. Expensive editing suites that are as sophisticated as Photoshop is.
What happened to the simple phone in pocket, take picture, edit in a simple app and upload?
Maybe I'm out of touch but why would you bother coming away from DSLR's in the first place if you hankered over such sophistication?
I even shudder when I hear some folk even carry bags of equipment around with them to use with their mobile phones, what does that remind you of?
Of course each to their own I'm not saying its wrong, I'm just asking are we loosing the way a little?
 
It seems intriguing to me to hear talk of BIG ipad pro's, Affinity editing, which seems to me to be basically a Photoshop clone, are we are getting away from the simple premise of 'mobile' photography?
Devices that are as powerful, if not more so than a desktop computer. Expensive editing suites that are as sophisticated as Photoshop is.
What happened to the simple phone in pocket, take picture, edit in a simple app and upload?
Maybe I'm out of touch but why would you bother coming away from DSLR's in the first place if you hankered over such sophistication?
I even shudder when I hear some folk even carry bags of equipment around with them to use with their mobile phones, what does that remind you of?
Of course each to their own I'm not saying its wrong, I'm just asking are we loosing the way a little?

Yes, that’s exactly what I’m struggling with in my decision whether or not to take the iPad Pro plunge. Of course I want one but I feel a principle at work here. When I started with the iPhone in a serious way I made a commitment to keep my iPhone Photography all mobile. No desktop, no laptop editing. I just use the desktop computer for storage. If I ever take my iPhone photos for a ride in Photoshop they cease to be mobile photos in my eyes. What happened to the all-in-one mobile studio concept? It’s dead if people shoot on mobile and offload to tablets to edit. It shows the mobile studio idea was a myth.
Now people are saying an iPad Pro is as good as a laptop or might be able to replace a laptop. So I feel I’m stepping over my own line.
On the other hand, I really want a better photo editor, or at least one that pulls together all the tools I want into one app without having to go app hopping. So far the only way to get it is on the iPad Pro. If I could get it on the iPhone I think I would pull the purist card and stay all in one box.
I don’t really think a $20.00 app is a match for Photoshop but it contains enough of the essential functions for most people. One thing people want to have is a replacement for AutoStitch and I think Affinity can provide that. I’m very interested in Focus Stacking and I think Affinity can provide that, too. I’m hoping it can also do 360 panorama stitching, which has its own quirks and specs compared to a partial panorama. I’m definitely looking for a proper editing suite for RAW photos.
Too many photo editing apps rely on quirky work-around to achieve basic functions, like burning and dodging. It is so seldom done correctly that you hardly ever hear mobile users talk about burning and dodging. Going back to the basics you had enlarge, crop, burn and dodge and that was basically it. Of course there was contrast adjustments by developing time or paper grades, but really that’s all there was, and just look at some real darkroom developed prints made from film negatives. Still hard to match.
I haven’t had the chance to try Affinity myself to see if it covers the essential bases for me and few people have the same specific interests I have to go out and test it to see if it will perform those functions. If I do go and spend the money for an iPad Pro and Affinity I won’t be happy if it falls short of my expectations.
I raised the issue once before that the whole iPad Pro lust indicates “we” aren’t fully satisfied with even our top line phones. We still want something more. So, yes, it troubles me, too.
Also, I’m exactly that person who carries a fanny pack full of iPhone accessories when I go out to photograph. Worse, they won’t all fit in there. Even so, my iPhone kit is tiny compared to what I lug around with my DSLR.
 
It seems intriguing to me to hear talk of BIG ipad pro's, Affinity editing, which seems to me to be basically a Photoshop clone, are we are getting away from the simple premise of 'mobile' photography?
Devices that are as powerful, if not more so than a desktop computer. Expensive editing suites that are as sophisticated as Photoshop is.
What happened to the simple phone in pocket, take picture, edit in a simple app and upload?
Maybe I'm out of touch but why would you bother coming away from DSLR's in the first place if you hankered over such sophistication?
I even shudder when I hear some folk even carry bags of equipment around with them to use with their mobile phones, what does that remind you of?
Of course each to their own I'm not saying its wrong, I'm just asking are we loosing the way a little?
The difference for me is that you still have to take the photo on the phone. Yes, once you add fancy lenses and what-not then the point is lost. Am I right in thinking that one of your mantras is that if the photo is not up to scratch then no manner of editing is going to make a difference? So I don't think we are there yet but when the iPhone finally catches up with the DSLR and I think it will, there will be no difference. People will look back on the 'proper' mobile era and the images from this time will be iconic. A bit like looking at old BW images.

When it comes to photo manipulation which is my real interest, the same is happening. When the Pro came out with the stylus, I noticed an instant improvement in people's work and I do think it made a massive difference to mine but that had a lot to do with eyesight and seeing the photo on a large screen. Photos that I thought were great on the phone weren't so great when I saw them large and to some extent this was sometimes revealed when I posted them.

I see a real difference in the type of arty images that are produced on mobile devices compared with Photoshop and I hope this doesn't get lost but I know it will. Already too many images are generated using software on servers and it shows. The cleverness for me was people producing awesome art with the small arty apps. They were different and funky. I will still use these apps a lot but something like Affinity helps me to clean them up better. Some of the actions in iColorama have a bad habit of pixelating an image. I've looked at passed images and it never used to do this. I might see myself doing more of the blending in Affinity. So I can't really see Affinity making a massive difference to me accept saving me time. Instead of spending hours cutting out an object for example it will be more efficient. Instead of having to know 10 little apps for fixing I just have to know one. But I am sure generally images will start to look like the ones on the desktop. Yes, the lines are blurring. It's called change.
 
I don’t know...this was in my inbox so I’m thinking this is a relatively recent post...a quick google search asking the question “is google ending support for Snapseed yielded several results like the following...
https://www.engadget.com/2017/05/30/google-nik-collection-support-ending/
Where it states that google has announced an end of desktop app sales of Snapseed.
 
It seems intriguing to me to hear talk of BIG ipad pro's, Affinity editing, which seems to me to be basically a Photoshop clone, are we are getting away from the simple premise of 'mobile' photography?
Devices that are as powerful, if not more so than a desktop computer. Expensive editing suites that are as sophisticated as Photoshop is.
What happened to the simple phone in pocket, take picture, edit in a simple app and upload?
Maybe I'm out of touch but why would you bother coming away from DSLR's in the first place if you hankered over such sophistication?
I even shudder when I hear some folk even carry bags of equipment around with them to use with their mobile phones, what does that remind you of?
Of course each to their own I'm not saying its wrong, I'm just asking are we loosing the way a little?

I’m finding this very thought provoking.
On one hand it’s like the difference between someone photographing with a rangefinder Leica and one lens vs a DSLR shooter with a bag of lenses. A very different aesthetic.
With respect to the phone vs DSLR quality, its all in the size of the sensor. As good as the mobile phone cameras get, the DSLRs (etc) are benefitting from the same advances. The mobile images are amazingly good considering the size of the sensor but compare the same photo made on any camera with a larger sensor and the reality of the situation will hit you.
So it must be something else at work. One thing is the challenge to see what can be accomplished with a simple small sensor camera. This is similar to the Diana Camera fad among film users. It’s a cheap simple camera with no controls and the fun is trying to see if you can produce good photos without the benefit of fancy technology. It takes a bit more care to pull it off.
 
QUOTE="ImageArt, post: 360931, member: 5828"]The difference for me is that you still have to take the photo on the phone.
- Why? The iPad has the same camera as the iPhone 7. The phone is the one with the fancy lenses. Dual lenses, portrait mode, etc. Do the photography on the iPad and you’re back to an all-in-one solution. But it’s true the iPhone camera is better than the iPad one.

Yes, once you add fancy lenses and what-not then the point is lost.
- There aren’t any add-on lenses anywhere near as fancy as the built-in dual cameras. That really is unique technology not found on any DSLR. The regular add-on lenses just alter the focusing distance, in the case of macros, and other lenses change the angle of view, just like the built-in dual lenses do. Nothing special about them.

Am I right in thinking that one of your mantras is that if the photo is not up to scratch then no manner of editing is going to make a difference?
- Yes, that’s essentially true. Being an old time traditional photographer I think that everything starts with a well crafted original image. It’s obvious that isn’t a widely accepted opinion these days. Lots of people don’t put much thought into their original photo and then rely on extensive apping to make something out of it. Even so, you can’t put highlight detail into an image that doesn’t have any. You can try to conceal the defects by adding textures, etc. But I think we’re not really talking about the same thing. Pictures made to be stand-alone images need good quality composition, colour, etc. Pictures made to be parts in a composite aren’t necessarily intended to be stand-alone images. They might be deliberately over exposed or they might be silhouettes, etc. Different thing altogether. However, even a composite needs a solid overall composition, so this is where starting with a good base image is important.

So I don't think we are there yet but when the iPhone finally catches up with the DSLR and I think it will, there will be no difference. People will look back on the 'proper' mobile era and the images from this time will be iconic. A bit like looking at old BW images.
- In a way, people already do this with digital vs film. I won’t bother to argue that one. The iPhone will never catch up to DSLRs since they both are advancing at the same rate. It’s possible a future iPhone may eventually equal an early DSLR. The over-riding limitation is the sensor size. I have an old Canon DSLR, just 6.3MP, and the quality is still quite superior to an iPhone image.

I see a real difference in the type of arty images that are produced on mobile devices compared with Photoshop and I hope this doesn't get lost but I know it will. Already too many images are generated using software on servers and it shows. The cleverness for me was people producing awesome art with the small arty apps. They were different and funky.
- You are comparing apps with presets with Photoshop without them. And the difference you refer to is what unskilled users can accomplish by relying on the expertise of imaging experts making the presets. People can use the presets but they don’t learn what has gone into the making of them. You don’t learn how to create the effect except with the help of the preset. I see a real problem with many apps that create effects that people use but the user has no idea how the effect is made. If you gave them Photoshop or Affinity without presets they would not know how to recreate the effects they currently like to use. People have relied on preset apps to create the magic and have not really developed any understanding about the workings of image editing. This is what I call the dumbing-us-down apps. Sure you can make neat effects but you don’t develop any skill while doing it. Take away the preset/filter and they can’t do it.

The biggest advancements in image quality will come from adopting RAW files.
Working with over-processed (by iOS) jpeg images cannot be improved by working on a bigger screen. The source file is the limiting factor. You don’t have to blow up a mobile jpeg very far to see it is mush. Working with RAW files is a different type of skill.
However, we accept the limitation of the low quality images because that’s what it is. That’s what everyone else is using so we just go with the flow. To fuss about ultimate image quality when no one else is interested is a waste of time.

So really, mobile photography is low fi or lomography. The challenge is to see what you can accomplish using such limited equipment. If the mobile cameras get too good then one of the unique aspects will be lost.

The main thing that makes mobile photography unique is the all-in-one package. Camera + built-in computer + software apps + connectivity - the mobile studio. More and more regular cameras are getting wifi connectivity. If they also get computer power to run third party editing apps then the jig is up. Of course no regular camera has enough space for an iPhone 7/8 Plus sized screen.

Photographers upload their DSLR images to iPads in exactly the same way you upload your iPhone images. The difference in quality is instantly apparent. It doesn’t even have to be a DSLR. Any compact camera with a bigger sensor will produce better quality images.
 
Sadly, I am one of those who loves what apps like Diana do to my images, but my favorites in Diana are the ones I don’t know how to reproduce. The same with TaDaa...my favorite presets are exactly the I don’t know how to create for myself. For me, the question is if, at 62, I want to spend time learning how to recreate what apps can do...or...do I want to just let the apps do their thing and use the resulting images in whatever way I choose to? I think laziness will rule and I’ll work on what makes my heart happy and let those who are smarter and more talented create the apps I love to use.
I used to be a purist...but I drifted ;)
 
Sadly, I am one of those who loves what apps like Diana do to my images, but my favorites in Diana are the ones I don’t know how to reproduce. The same with TaDaa...my favorite presets are exactly the I don’t know how to create for myself. For me, the question is if, at 62, I want to spend time learning how to recreate what apps can do...or...do I want to just let the apps do their thing and use the resulting images in whatever way I choose to? I think laziness will rule and I’ll work on what makes my heart happy and let those who are smarter and more talented create the apps I love to use.
I used to be a purist...but I drifted ;)

Choosing what makes our hearts happy is the best thing. I think that makes our hearts a little happier also more medically speaking [emoji173]️[emoji851]
 
Sadly, I am one of those who loves what apps like Diana do to my images, but my favorites in Diana are the ones I don’t know how to reproduce. The same with TaDaa...my favorite presets are exactly the I don’t know how to create for myself. For me, the question is if, at 62, I want to spend time learning how to recreate what apps can do...or...do I want to just let the apps do their thing and use the resulting images in whatever way I choose to? I think laziness will rule and I’ll work on what makes my heart happy and let those who are smarter and more talented create the apps I love to use.
I used to be a purist...but I drifted ;)

I really like Dianna, too, and I’ve spent some time trying to figure out how each favourite style is made. They are more complex than they look. Not just a simple overlay. There’s masking and blending modes and probably some hidden layers. Yes I can recreate some in Photoshop but it sure takes some time. There’s one Photoshop blending mode I like that’s missing from anything else I’ve seen and that’s the conditional blend-if.
There’s a playful explorative aspect in Diana that is lacking in Photoshop. There are many Diana effects I find frustrating because they almost get me where I want to go but not quite and I can’t control the elements enough to make it work. Sometimes it’s great and sometimes it just doesn’t work.
Imagine if you could make your own effects in Diana and have the Diana platform to use them.
 
Sadly, I am one of those who loves what apps like Diana do to my images, but my favorites in Diana are the ones I don’t know how to reproduce. The same with TaDaa...my favorite presets are exactly the I don’t know how to create for myself. For me, the question is if, at 62, I want to spend time learning how to recreate what apps can do...or...do I want to just let the apps do their thing and use the resulting images in whatever way I choose to? I think laziness will rule and I’ll work on what makes my heart happy and let those who are smarter and more talented create the apps I love to use.
I used to be a purist...but I drifted ;)
Choosing what makes our hearts happy is the best thing. I think that makes our hearts a little happier also more medically speaking [emoji173]️[emoji851]
Well said, Ryn and Eva. It doesn’t matter what we use - it’s what makes us happy.
 
on is if, at 62, I want to spend time learning how to recreate what apps can do...or...do I want to just let the apps do their thing and use the resulting images in whatever way I choose to? I think laziness will rule and I’ll work on what makes my heart happy and let those who are smarter and more talented create the apps I love to use.
I used to be a purist...but I drifted ;)

Choosing what makes our hearts happy is the best thing. I think that makes our hearts a little happier also more medically speaking [emoji173]️[emoji851]

Well said, Ryn and Eva. It doesn’t matter what we use - it’s what makes us happy.

Drifting is the best part of purism. Sounds similar to what I call my ‘high horse’ — over the years I’ve realised any high horse I get up on (ie moral high ground) I’m eventually going to fall (or be pushed) off, so if I can stay off in the first place I save myself a lot of indignity.

Further clichés: different strokes for different folks. For me, art is a joy I discovered late in life. Even *blush* using stock images to teach myself digital collage and/or inspire me with a style or something else I’d never have thought of myself — it’s a joy.

I’d like to learn the basics of photo manipulation. As Brian says I’m curious about the *how* and I wonder what more I could do if I knew more. But mostly I think I’m more in Ryn’s mode: the time I spend on art disappears quite happily poking around with various apps, trying new brushes in SketchClub, vowing that One Day I will Organise My Photo Cache, discovering new sites (like polyvore Ann introduced me to here (https://www.mobitog.com/threads/ann’s-arty-attempts.23028/#post-361407) and browsing old ones like Pinterest for inspiration, things to copy/try, things to make me feel like an absolute klutz who should stick to paint by numbers . . . :lmao:
 
I really like Dianna, too, and I’ve spent some time trying to figure out how each favourite style is made. They are more complex than they look. Not just a simple overlay. There’s masking and blending modes and probably some hidden layers. Yes I can recreate some in Photoshop but it sure takes some time. There’s one Photoshop blending mode I like that’s missing from anything else I’ve seen and that’s the conditional blend-if.
There’s a playful explorative aspect in Diana that is lacking in Photoshop. There are many Diana effects I find frustrating because they almost get me where I want to go but not quite and I can’t control the elements enough to make it work. Sometimes it’s great and sometimes it just doesn’t work.
Imagine if you could make your own effects in Diana and have the Diana platform to use them.
Lol, Brian...it would probably be great if Diana could do that....but I doubt I’m that talented...or that smart...but I’d love to see what you can do :thumbs:
 
Lol, Brian...it would probably be great if Diana could do that....but I doubt I’m that talented...or that smart...but I’d love to see what you can do :thumbs:

You see. That’s exactly my point. In most cases what Diana can do isn’t that complicated. If it explained to you how it was done you could easily do it yourself. Then you would be learning as you go, expanding your skills. As it is we use apps that keep their methods secret, we learn nothing, except dependence, and become convinced we’re not that smart. What users can accomplish becomes a given set of possibilities, that start to become recognizable over time as coming from this or that app. This is why I think more apps should take an interest in helping users learn new skills rather than encouraging dependency. The dumbing-us-down approach does everyone a disservice in the long run.
 
You see. That’s exactly my point. In most cases what Diana can do isn’t that complicated. If it explained to you how it was done you could easily do it yourself. Then you would be learning as you go, expanding your skills. As it is we use apps that keep their methods secret, we learn nothing, except dependence, and become convinced we’re not that smart. What users can accomplish becomes a given set of possibilities, that start to become recognizable over time as coming from this or that app. This is why I think more apps should take an interest in helping users learn new skills rather than encouraging dependency. The dumbing-us-down approach does everyone a disservice in the long run.
I absolutely have to agree with you on this :)
As for me, I think I’ve always looked st my photos as either a reference for drawing/painting, a cataloguing of things, or as starting points for manipulation and collage. Only recently have I considered them as “frame worthy” in their own right (only for myself) because I have more windows than walls and wall space is fought over by original artwork and family photos. I even gave up on a hanging calendar because of wall space issues :lol: so....my “dumbing down” might already have occurred ;)
 
OK then, all you Affinity folks. What about those exclusive features in Affinity like DNG development, focus stacking, panorama stitching, etc. Are you just using Affinity as a fancier iColorama?
 
OK then, all you Affinity folks. What about those exclusive features in Affinity like DNG development, focus stacking, panorama stitching, etc. Are you just using Affinity as a fancier iColorama?

Well, the exclusive features are not “in my wheelhouse”. So yes, I guess you could say that I’m using it as a standard layering app. (I wouldn’t compare it to iColorama since iColorama is not a layering app, and iColorama has many effects that Affinity doesn’t attempt to do.)
 
Well, the exclusive features are not “in my wheelhouse”. So yes, I guess you could say that I’m using it as a standard layering app. (I wouldn’t compare it to iColorama since iColorama is not a layering app, and iColorama has many effects that Affinity doesn’t attempt to do.)
Ditto.
 
Well, the exclusive features are not “in my wheelhouse”. So yes, I guess you could say that I’m using it as a standard layering app. (I wouldn’t compare it to iColorama since iColorama is not a layering app, and iColorama has many effects that Affinity doesn’t attempt to do.)

I should have said Leonardo.
 
Focus Stacking in Affinity!
The short version; yes, it works great!
I’ve only had Affinity a couple of days. I watched some of the tutorials and it helped a lot. I think diving into Affinity without the tutorials would lead to a lot of stumbling around but with only 3 or 4 of the first tutorials it all makes logical sense. Mind you, I haven’t tried everything yet. I did make a few image tweaks while I was at it and had no trouble finding the proper tools.
Focus Stacking is the first thing I tried to do with Affinity and it is the one topic I didn’t find in the tutorials. But no matter. You pretty well just select your focus stack images and press OK and it’s done.
If you are not familiar with Focus Stacking here’s an overview. When you want more depth of field in a photo that one shot is capable of recording you need Focus Stacking. You need a secure tripod, frame your shot, make a series of photos, each at a different focus distance, perhaps 5 photos, and that is your focus stack image set.
269C37AA-2E07-4348-96E7-7ED4A98F3C52.jpeg

This first photo is one of my focus stack set. I think the 2nd focus position from the front. You can easily see how the background goes out of focus before we see all the apples. This series was 5 photos. In each one you can distinctly see an area out of focus in the subject area of the image - the apples.
DE19F381-0A3C-4C34-966F-CE37B89BF456.jpeg

This is the Focus Stacked image made by Affinity. You can see there is more focus in front and a lot more farther into the photo. With a DSLR you would simply select a smaller aperture like f11 but the iPhone has a fixed aperture of f1.8 on recent cameras for the wide angle lens and f2.8 for the 2x. There’s a narrow strip right at the bottom that is blurred and I forgot to crop it out. This is a typical artifact of Focus Stacking, in other programs too.

Close up photos typically have an even shallower depth of field than scenic photos and getting even a small range in focus is a challenge.
0BDFCB85-CDA6-4AB8-B94A-624489377FA2.jpeg

This first photo is one of my 5-shot focus stack series. Quite obviously out of focus in the front.

3F3D1C48-0ABE-4E50-B09B-191F6AADE72E.jpeg

This is the Focus Stacked image made by Affinity. The branch the fungi are on is about the diameter of a broomstick. In that short distance it took 5 photos to provide enough sharp areas to make one usable photo.

In Affinity here’s what happens. My 5 photos are imported and each put on a separate layer, one directly on top of the other. Affinity analyzes and compares each image to align them and then looks for the areas in best focus. Then it blends those sharp(est) areas together into one image. You can see the 5 layers in the layers "studio", I almost said palette (gasp), and associated masks. Then you flatten the stack into a single image. It is much like stitching a panorama.

There are a few apps dedicated to automate the process of making the focus stack set. StayFocused was the first, FocusCamera - but it is limited to 3 photos in the stack, and more recently, CameraPixels, which looks very promising as it is a higher end camera to start with. With your iPhone on the tripod you first set the nearest and farthest focus positions and decide on how many photo to make for your series and press the shutter. The problem up to now is that there has been no on-device processing of Focus Stack images. But now we have Affinity, although only on iPad, and... now that I have a new iPad Pro to run Affinity I’m very excited!
 
Focus Stacking in Affinity!
The short version; yes, it works great!
I’ve only had Affinity a couple of days. I watched some of the tutorials and it helped a lot. I think diving into Affinity without the tutorials would lead to a lot of stumbling around but with only 3 or 4 of the first tutorials it all makes logical sense. Mind you, I haven’t tried everything yet. I did make a few image tweaks while I was at it and had no trouble finding the proper tools.
Focus Stacking is the first thing I tried to do with Affinity and it is the one topic I didn’t find in the tutorials. But no matter. You pretty well just select your focus stack images and press OK and it’s done.
If you are not familiar with Focus Stacking here’s an overview. When you want more depth of field in a photo that one shot is capable of recording you need Focus Stacking. You need a secure tripod, frame your shot, make a series of photos, each at a different focus distance, perhaps 5 photos, and that is your focus stack image set.
View attachment 106474
This first photo is one of my focus stack set. I think the 2nd focus position from the front. You can easily see how the background goes out of focus before we see all the apples. This series was 5 photos. In each one you can distinctly see an area out of focus in the subject area of the image - the apples.
View attachment 106475
This is the Focus Stacked image made by Affinity. You can see there is more focus in front and a lot more farther into the photo. With a DSLR you would simply select a smaller aperture like f11 but the iPhone has a fixed aperture of f1.8 on recent cameras for the wide angle lens and f2.8 for the 2x. There’s a narrow strip right at the bottom that is blurred and I forgot to crop it out. This is a typical artifact of Focus Stacking, in other programs too.

Close up photos typically have an even shallower depth of field than scenic photos and getting even a small range in focus is a challenge.
View attachment 106477
This first photo is one of my 5-shot focus stack series. Quite obviously out of focus in the front.

View attachment 106476
This is the Focus Stacked image made by Affinity. The branch the fungi are on is about the diameter of a broomstick. In that short distance it took 5 photos to provide enough sharp areas to make one usable photo.

In Affinity here’s what happens. My 5 photos are imported and each put on a separate layer, one directly on top of the other. Affinity analyzes and compares each image to align them and then looks for the areas in best focus. Then it blends those sharp(est) areas together into one image. You can see the 5 layers in the layers "studio", I almost said palette (gasp), and associated masks. Then you flatten the stack into a single image. It is much like stitching a panorama.

There are a few apps dedicated to automate the process of making the focus stack set. StayFocused was the first, FocusCamera - but it is limited to 3 photos in the stack, and more recently, CameraPixels, which looks very promising as it is a higher end camera to start with. With your iPhone on the tripod you first set the nearest and farthest focus positions and decide on how many photo to make for your series and press the shutter. The problem up to now is that there has been no on-device processing of Focus Stack images. But now we have Affinity, although only on iPad, and... now that I have a new iPad Pro to run Affinity I’m very excited!
At last! Now you will know how much you have been missing out!
 
I just imported a bunch of dng files from my iPhone to try in Affinity. My eye caught on a focus stack set of peppers. So I’m doing Focus Stacking with DNG files. I was curious to see if there would be any hitches. Nope. Just as easy as jpegs, except with better detail potential.
CE20E13F-2491-4FDE-AC99-D85FD7DD0FD8.jpeg

This first image is #2 in the focus stack, focused about the level of the front edge of the orange pepper. Any time you make photos with the plane of focus not parallel to the subject plane you can expect this sort of focus fall-off.
8B4B8DB4-211D-4A8C-AB0B-20A64D54F0F7.jpeg

This second photo is the Focus Stacked one from Affinity. It is just coincidence that the examples I have shown were all stacks of 5 images. I’m just as likely to use 4 or 7, or 9, or whatever, depending on the subject.
If you try Focus Stacking I can tell you my most common early failures were caused by the closest focus position not being close enough the keep the very nearest parts of the subject in focus. It’s a good idea to make an extra shot at either extreme just to be sure.
If you decide to try Focus Stacking using a manual focus camera app rather than a focus Stacking app I think a good candidate for a Focus Stacking camera is Prime, because: it shoots RAW, it has an excellent focus peaking display so you get a much better idea of the area in focus, and it has a long focus scale up the left side of the frame as another guide to your focus position. It appears I made this focus stack set in PureShot using manual focus.
Can you guess I was from the f16 school of thought when I photographed with larger format cameras. Actually, the large view camera people were in the f64 club. With my smaller 4 x 5" view camera, the more common size, f22 was good enough. On top of that, with a view camera you have tilt and shift movements allowing you to tip the lens forward and down toward the subject, in this case, which would actually move the plane of focus to be on the same plane as the flat surface of the peppers. And the 4 x 5" negatives or transparencies were spectacular. That’s how you shoot black and white!
 
Back
Top Bottom