Maybe one indirectly related question. Do you think the last two tasks, focus stacking and exposure bracketing, could be implemented directly in Darktable?
I have to admit, I really love Darktable. For me itās like a violin to a violinist, and if I have to use some other program, I feel like someone is sending me to play percussions.
in DT you can use the ācreate HDRā option in the Lighttable āselected imagesā tab. Bruce Williams illustrates the use in his no 30 tutorial. However, I would advise against this option in DT, as the module does not align the images, it seems to simply superimpose images and that is it.
in this way you can images composed of totally unrelated ones and obtain a nice mess
I also like Darktable, but I donāt think that either fits very well into its profile.
The key features are alignment and masking: an algorithm aligns the images (hugin really shines here), and then another algorithm selects which images contributes to the final one (you manually correct this). Darktable has no comparative advantage here: the algorithm would have to be ported from some other software, and its GUI is designed for something else.
Once a high bit depth large image is created, you get to the point where Darktable really shines. Last time I used Hugin I would do demosaicing, lens correction and CA, export to TIFF, and then use Hugin, and then take back the result to Darktable. But it appears that Hugin can just call Darktable now for the first step. If anyone tested this, I would be curious about it.
I use the āHDRMergeā Lua script for exposure stacking. In contrast to the built-in darktable HDR function, it can actually align the images, so with my IBIS camera I can do exposure bracketing handheld.
Can I recommend microsoftās Image Composite Editor (ICE) for panorama stitching, but of course you needs a windows computer. I have not tried it in the Wine environment yet. But it is an incredible free panorama stitcher which I prefer over hugin. But Hugin would be a good option on a Linux or Mac computer.
Iāve used Hugin a lot over the years for panoramas, and Iām told it will also do a good job of focus-stacking, although Iāve never followed the extensive instructions on how to get it to do that.
Iāve had a couple of times(out of hundreds, I guess) where Hugin didnāt like some aspect or other of my images, and yielded unpredictable results. For example a 5-image panorama of our archery target range was processed to have a nasty bend on the far left by Hugin. My daughterās copy of Affinity Photo gave an image that had the correct perspective.
I now use paid software routinely for image stitching.
I followed a number of tutorials on focus stacking in GIMP, and though tedious, itās possible to get some excellent results. (Example in mono.)
Iāve also found that working with a mouse (to focus-stack in GIMP) is not a pleasurable process. I use a graphics tablet - I have a wireless āUgeeā brand that works an absolute treat in windows and Linux. It cost me about AUD$80 during the last November sale on AliExpress.
Enblend-enfuse is the underlying program of hugin. I havenāt used chimp stacker (yet) but the demo photos are impressive. Focus-stack works pretty well for landscapes but not that well on macro, lots of photos exhibit out of focus blooming (not sure what this artifact is called).
I have used Hugin before, but it often didnāt work well. I tried Affinity Photo and Capture One as well, which had similar problems: alignment sometimes failed, moving objects were only partially in/excluded.
Nowadays I use PTGui, an expensive, proprietary tool (Win/Lin/Mac) that shares some history with Hugin. It is however much faster, alignment is much more robust, and it can export an aligned image stack, allowing you to mask out layers and objects manually. The only other tool I know of that has this functionality is Photoshop. It has rescued many a lost cause, though. It truly is good software, seemingly developed by a single person, and runs on Linux.
I know it has been over a year since this topic was covered but I thought I would share my experience from today. I have a canon R7 which does focus stacking in the camera and seems very efficient but out put is a JPG. I then shot some RAW files with the canon using manual focus and did six shots at various focus points for a macro. I tried affinity Photos for focus stacking and initially thought the result looked good, but changed my mind when I compared it to what the Canon software did for focus stacking. Canon software is free to those who own a canon and have a computer with a suitable OS such as Windows. The Canon software produced a better focus stack than affinity and allowed a 8,16 or 32 bit tiff output. Affinities result had artefacts which looked like blooming. Definitely didnāt pass the test.
I plan to test enfuse , focus stack and other FOSS software later as well, but it was nice that the Canon software is free to use and handles CR3 raw files. I suspect you could get it to focus stack JPG files from non-canon cameras. Maybe even tiff exports from DT and RT.