[falconeye]

In a recent thread (https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/post-processing-software/52007-any-other-...e-choices.html) about DoF software choices, I have become aware of two major choices:

• Helicon Focus
  Image editing software: Products
  Version 4.75
  pricing $115 (Lite version, if used for more than a year)
  .
• PhotoAcute Studio
  Take Better Photos, reduce noise, increase quality and resolution of digital photographs. Leading superresolution technology.
  Version 2.9
  pricing $49 (Std version; $115 Pro version supporting SLR profiles, 16Bit and Raw; free if one submits a profile)

I decided to do a shoot-out test for a subject I knew is difficult to master.

The first two images (in the attachment) show 2 images with focus on the background and foreground, resp. Handheld with both misalignment and misrotation. From a DA*300/4 shot on Fuji Velvia

PhotoAcute aligned perfectly out of the box. Helicon Focus required an adjustment of permissable misalignment and misrotation from 3% and 0 to much larger values. These parameters are hidden deeply down in an advanced parameter box.

PhotoAcute has no parameters specific for focus stacking (with many images in a stack, it would additionally allow the doubling of resolution which I turned off).

Helicon Focus has four parameters specific to focus stacking:
- M (Method A/B)
- R (Radius)
- S (Smoothing)
- F (Depth map feathering in an advanced parameter box)

The images in the attachment are in this order:

1. Background original
2. Foreground original
3. PhotoAcute output
4. Helicon Focus (default: M=B/R=8/S=4/F=3)
5. Helicon Focus (M=B/R=50/S=1/F=3)

I played a lot with Helicon Focus' parameters. Only to find out that I couldn't improve on the default settings.

Both focus stackers do their job, but only up to a point. They both fail to maintain a clear notion of what is foreground and what is background. So, the red tubes of the barrow in the foreground become transparent, an effect unwanted for. This is because the background image "sees" thhru the blurred foreground and if it hits any detail, it is painted in lieu of the foreground. A similiarity analysis could have avoided this. Both focus stackers fail to incorporate this level of algorithmic sophistication.

Putting very high values for R can emphasize the foreground with Helicon Focus. But only of the price to miss large areas of the background. So, no solution either.

I can see very slight advantages in the output of Helicon Focus (one red tube is a little clearer), but overall, they are almost indistinguishable.


Final verdict:
Both software products perform comparably well w/o being excellent. Helicon Focus is much more specialized with many manual parameters. But they don't translate into significantly superior output. Both seem to use a similiar algorithm under the hood. PhotoAcute is much more general. Both seem to have a command line interface for automated tasks.


Note:
Here is a focus stacking comparison between PhotoAcute and Photoshop CS4:
http://www.stanleybreeden.com/index.php/technique/28-tutorials/60-first-impr...oshop-cs4.html

---

Last edited by falconeye; 06-15-2011 at 05:28 AM.