simmo39

Wow, that is a great work. You seem to be banging them out at the moment. I gave up on the M81 M82 image, just couldnt get it right and to top it off I now have an LED street light ove my garden! but as they say no pain no gain.

Always luv images of the witches head and yours is brilliant example.

Hi all, This was and is still an experiment. The other night I noticed that my old street lamp had changed to a LED type! It was so bright in my garden that I could read a book! not very happy but dertermined to see what damage it had done to my photography I set up on  the last clear night and did a couple of hours on the seagull. As the title points out my framing was terrible but at least I got something despite the sreet lamps best efferts! In future I am going to have to try and get some sort of shade but as for this image I was pleased considering the short time on target.

30 x 240s subs taken with my Askar 400 without the FR fitted and using an Optalong Ex filter

And a crop

Any hints tips an CC welcome, Also any tips with dealing with LED street lamps!

V nice!

9 hours ago, Fegato said:

I use all three of the tools:

BlurX - at the end of linear processing, just before first stretch

StarX - after a first light stretch, run with the unscreened option. I find the EZ Soft Stretch defaults give me about the right stretch for taking my stars out, so that's often the precursor to this. I'll adjust star saturation and add them back in as last step in my processing

NoiseX - normally after just a bit more stretching. The documentation suggests running this in non-linear state, but not after too much processing, so if I've got some complicated stuff to do (e.g. HDR) I'd certainly do it before that, and anyway, before final stretch adjustments and changes to saturation etc.

NB I've also started using StarX with DBE during linear processing, after spotting it in an Adam Block youtube post. You can remove the stars with the screened option, use DBE with much more freedom (but remember to have normalised option ticked) and then add the stars back before colour calibration etc.

I'm not exactly lazy, and I do want to spend some effort on a good result, but I must admit that these tools have totally replaced any other noise reduction techniques, my occasional poor attempts at deconvolution, as well as largely removing the need for star masks.

Thanks for the flow, this is more or less what I have been doing.

As the title says. I have been using PI for several years and still consider myself as a beginner. I have just jumped on to the exterminator software band wagon and find them all very good but my question is when to use them in a work flow for a OSC camera. I'm getting ok results at the moment but think I might be missing something . Thanks in advance. 

Yep, a fine image.

The mix is the best in my humble opinion.

6 hours ago, Zummerzet_Leveller said:

 

Thanks both.

@simmo39 just re-processed this data with the newly updated Siril tools that now incorporate StarnetV2 and some great hyperbolic curve controls.  Gone for a slightly more colourful version this time.  The recomposition tool that brings the starless and stars back together in Siril really helps manage them better.

Thats looking real nice. I was out last night collecting more data so hopefully Ill have something to show in a few days. BTW the colour looks v good and the stars are well controlled, something I need to work on.

Stunning shot as usual. Looks like the image they took of my retina a few years back! Lol

V nice, real depth.

19 hours ago, Zummerzet_Leveller said:

Thanks Simmo.  I only added the luminance layer once the image was starless and then only in GIMP (luminance setting) with a low opacity (about 1/3).  I found the luminance washed out all of the colour.  So the stars in my image are only RGB.  It's just a shame they are so bloaty.  Even before a stretch in a linear state the most prominent stars were big.  I think in future I'll do shorter RGB subs for the stars.  It's all a learning curve but with the miserable skies we've been having we have to take what we can get!

Still playing with my version of this, think I need another night of data to get anywhere near your image. I seem to be struggling with the star size now! I think it's catching!

That is so good. I can only dream of getting an image like that.

What a super image!

17 minutes ago, jjohnson3803 said:

I vote for HOO.  

 

Thank you.

5 minutes ago, ollypenrice said:

I like both. When I replace stars I find it advantageous to give them a slight Gaussian blur (about 0.5 in Photoshop money) to help them look less harsh. Also, I sometimes try applying them at a tad less than full opacity. Again, this helps settle them into the image.

Olly

thanks for the tip, Im afraid Im a PI user  ( can give it up anytime, honest )so will have to find the equivalents.

V nice m8. I happen to me working on this target but cant seem to get the star colour to shine like yours.

Wow just wow!

Nice, like the colours!

So close I can touch it!

7 hours ago, windjammer said:

I rather fancy the false SHO !

Thank you.

Stunning!

5 minutes ago, MartinB said:

You've got a lot of nice detail and the stars look OK to me.  So to some extent it is down to aesthetics and personal preference. I like the amount of reflection nebulosity the SHO rendition has produced but much prefer the red colour of the HOO. 

Thank you, I think im getting lazy. I have a mono camera and filtes and could do a proper SHO image but for me the ease of the colour camera and playing around with the image is a little easier especially with the limited time we get to take subs.

Nice!

Hi all, I have been getting a bit of data on the Cone Nebula over last few clearish nights and after do a bit of processing in PI I thought the stars looked, well to harsh. Last night I went out and did a bit of data collection without any filter ( I have been using an Optalong extreme filter ) to see if I could make the stars a little better. Im not sure if I have done what I set out to achieve but I have had enough for today so here they are. I did one in HOO and the other in a false SHO. They are a little rough but I do like the false SHO image. Taken with my Askar 400 and ASI 2600mc.

Hints, tips and CC most welcome.

Thanks for looking.

Yep thats how to do it!