Your stacking experiences with HeliconFocus and Zerene Stacker software

[fdupre]

Hello everyone,

I share 2 images of a bumblebee. One stacked with Helicon Focus and the other stacked with Zerene Stacker.
The 149 source images are exactly the same and the development once the stacked image was done in Photoshop CS6 with the same corrections (contrast/emphasis filter on the non-resampled image/optimized sharpness on the image under-resampled at 50% ).
The stacking parameters in Helicon Focus are: C method with a smoothing of 4 :

image stacked with Helicon Focus

abeille_obj-amscope4x_flashMH_Helicon.jpg (313.26 KiB) Viewed 2101 times

The stacking parameters in Zerene Stacker are: Pmax method with the "Grip Suppression" option checked in the preferences :

image stacked with Zerene Stacker

abeille_obj-amscope4x_flashMH_Zerene.jpg (314.72 KiB) Viewed 2101 times

I have been using Helicon Focus for a few months and I am generally satisfied with it, however I find a few small "flaws" in it;
Method C tends to be less resolved on very small details than method B but above all method B generates a blur of a few pixels more or less important on the sharp contour areas.

I was able to carry out some tests with Zerene Stacker and it seems to me (in my opinion which is subjective by nature), that it manages the hard contour zones better.
So I'm thinking about also acquiring Zerene Stacker but user reviews would help me a lot in my thinking.

I am well aware that the 2 software must each have their own faults and qualities. If you have any feedback to share regarding these 2 stacking software, please don't hesitate

Sincerely,
Frank

[Macro_Cosmos]

Speed: Helicon
Precision: Zerene

[fdupre]

Thank you for your feedback Macro_Cosmos

[Scarodactyl]

Helicon has been good for me, but I rarely shoot hairy subjects.

[josmann]

As I understand it, the general workflow you should follow in Zerene is to generate Dmap and Pmax, use Dmap as your primary image and then retouch blurry spots with the Pmax stack.

More info here: https://zerenesystems.com/cms/stacker/d ... utorial003

[Alexander]

I have both but use mostly Helicon. I found Zerene to be ridiculously slow. A short stack of 50 pictures take several minutes. Don't ask how long a stack of 500 pictures takes to be processed.

[fdupre]

I have both but use mostly Helicon. I found Zerene to be ridiculously slow. A short stack of 50 pictures take several minutes. Don't ask how long a stack of 500 pictures takes to be processed.

Hello everyone, hello Alexander,
Like you, I mainly use Helicon but I "quickly" tested and noticed that Zerene, it seems to me, tends to be more precise in very fine details as Macro_Cosmos says, on the other hand it is true that it is much slower than Helicon.
Sincerely,
Frank

[ADi]

Hello Frank,

I have seen many such surveys.
Most of the time, the users praise the tool they are using.

I bought Zerene when it was on sale

But I test other tools from time to time,
like Picolay, Stacky, Helicon Focus, etc.

BTW, I personally also find that the Zerene gives the best results,
but the difference is getting smaller and smaller.

Best, ADi

[fdupre]

Hello ADi,
Thanks for your feedback
I don't know the Stacky software. Do you have an official download link please?
Best, Frank

[ADi]

Hello Frank,
This is probably the best one
Unfortunately I only found the German version
http://www.bewie.de/stacky.php
Best, ADi

[fdupre]

Thanks ADi