My First Imaging Attempt

[terrym2002uk]

Well the clouds finally cleared for a bit over the weekend, so I thought I would attempt my first ever images.

The two images are of M57 and M13 taken unguided with a 200PDS and unmodded EOS 500D.

Both consist of 14minutes of 30sec subs @ ISO 800, with 20 darks/flats/bias frames. These were stacked in DSS and post processed in StarTools. May have over done the post processing a tad.

I'm generally pleased with my first attempt, but i wish i had collected more subs for each. Any feedback, hints and tips would be great. Feel free to be critical

Full images can be found here:

http://dl.dropbox.com/u/36405099/M13-sat.tiff

http://dl.dropbox.com/u/36405099/M57-final.tiff

[shaunster]

First attempts? they look really good. Just think what you will doing after a year...

[Ags]

Very good - I particularly like your M13.

[RikM]

Wow. These are very nice for firsts. Your focus is good and the star shapes are good. You have kept quite a bit of star colour in there which can be tricky with DSS. I think you could probably pull a bit more out of your M13 image but you definitely don't want to overstretch it. On my monitor they both look a bit red.

With an HEQ5 you should be able to get 60-90sec subs and that will allow you to pull out loads more. Very well done indeed. Look forward to more.

[terrym2002uk]

Thanks for everyones words of encouragement. The weather has been dire over the last 3 weeks so I've had plenty of time to read and practice on some images I hijacked from the forum:D

You have kept quite a bit of star colour in there which can be tricky with DSS. I think you could probably pull a bit more out of your M13 image but you definitely don't want to overstretch it. On my monitor they both look a bit red.

To be honest, I really struggled trying to preserve and balance the colour. Now I look at them I can see that they far too red. I think i've been at these all day! Must be eye stain.

With an HEQ5 you should be able to get 60-90sec subs and that will allow you to pull out loads more.

The first few subs I took at 60 seconds seemed to be a bit glowy so I dropped down to 30 seconds. . I wasnt sure if it was good to have that much glow. Also I didnt think my polar alignment was that great as I started to get some trails too. I've attached one of the 60sec subs so you can see what I mean.

I would love to see what is possible with the data I collected. If anyone fancy's a crack the stacked tifs can be downloaded from here:

http://dl.dropbox.com/u/36405099/STgo1.zip

Cheers

[RikM]

It sounds crazy, but if you suffer from light pollution, you want longer subs not shorter. It still gives you a stronger target signal to work with and you can fix LP to a large extent in the processing.

[RikM]

Quick and dirty tweak. Very crude, sorry.

[terrym2002uk]

Quick and dirty tweak. Very crude, sorry.

That nicely illustrates your point. I just need to nail the alignment a bit better ..... was never much of an issue before when I had my eye to the scope.

[terrym2002uk]

Okay, Ive restacked my M57 and reprocessed it in StarTools. Here's a crop of the main area of the frame. Hopefully the colours looks a little more natural this time.

I would love to take all the credit for this, but I have to thank Ivo the developer of StarTools (StarTools | Astrophotography Image Processing) for personally writing me a 3 page tutorial on how to best use his program. Great guy and shameless plug, but it really took all the pain out of stretching and curves.

Right off for another crack and M13 amd M27.

[star333]

That's nice work but I think color of the stars are looks natural. do some more work on it.

[wackyscot]

Cracking Terry, 2 of my fave targets

David

[terrym2002uk]

Well after a toiling away all night - Here is my prepocessed M13. Im not sure if im happy with it but its definetly better that the first attempt I hope. I think im heading in the right direction?

One question though. How do you know when to stop and leave it alone?

[RikM]

It is always tempting to over-do it. In this case, your sky is far too dark and unnatural looking. You have clipped the black point on the levels slider. Some people like the jet black background and glowing neon targets, but it is not to my taste.

That said, this is very nicely framed and focussed image. Your data is really good, it just needs a bit more practise with the processing, but then...practise makes perfect.

[terrym2002uk]

Cheers Rik.

I'll try and not over do it next time, which will hopefully equate to less time! I don't want to make imaging my life's work as I like to spent time looking through the scope, but its nice to be able to see what your eye can't now and again if you know what I mean.

[jager945]

It is always tempting to over-do it. In this case, your sky is far too dark and unnatural looking. You have clipped the black point on the levels slider. Some people like the jet black background and glowing neon targets, but it is not to my taste.

Clipping is of course a big no-no, but I have to vehemently disagree with the black level clipping assertion Rik (and so do my histograms) - is your screen properly calibrated? I can see no black level clipping at all. Edit: I attached a version of M13 that has all its pixel levels multiplied by 10x - remember that 0 x 10 would still be 0 (e.g. black) but as you can see no pixel is perfectly black in this image.

I can't see any 'neon'-like clipping/glowing either, but maybe you were just speaking in general?

You're right of course that space is not perfectly black and, but as long as that is reflected in the image at whatever level (and it is in this case), then an image is 'correct' as far as I'm concerned.

As a matter of fact, I think Terry has done a decent job here with the data at hand. Looking at the raw data (which he posted above), the individual stars in the cluster didn't resolve all that well. The reduced resolution image as posted here almost makes up for the 'wandering' of the stars across multiple pixels. It could maybe use some sharpening, but all-in all I think this is a decent interpretation given the data.

[wackyscot]

Terry - as a relative newbie to imaging, I think purists will always lambast what's right and wrong, I think you have a wonderfull image there and would be chuffed to bits with that. Sorry if I offend the sticklers but if it looks good - and it does to me (not being a purist) you are doing something right. Who cares if the core is burnt out, when you image, and are like me, new to it, any image which is presentable can be played around with. I may be hitting a nerve here, but just my opinion, newcomers to imaging go through a process (which I'm going through) of tweaking and processing an clipping etc, it's a learning curve.

Instead of criticising, I think imho you should be encouraged to go on , not criticised for what you haven't done.

I myself am learning from mistakes, my budget is limited, so I have to make do with the equipment available, I just think folk like Terry and me should have more "pats on the back" rather than negative comments - ok rant over, I'd still be chuffed with that Terry, but what do I know!!!!

David

[terrym2002uk]

Guys

There is no clipping in the histogram and the backgrounds are really not solid black. The originals were low on resolution as I foolishly left my primary fan on and dewed up the primary.....how annoyed was I... but lesson learnt.

I appreciate that blackness level is a personal preference and I am trying to reach that balance. Its just gonna take some time to get the knack in doing the processing. I don't want imaging to end up being my life's work.. not after medals just something reasonable. If you know what I mean.

As David says its a steep learning curve and as a beginner I'm going to make mistakes,have problems and need guidance and advice . After all that's why I'm here.

[jager945]

Right on David!

When I embarked on the whole imaging adventure I, of course, learned about the 'rockstars' of astro imaging. One of these indisputable 'rockstars' is Rogelio Bernal Andreo (Deep Sky Colors - Astrophotography by Rogelio Bernal Andreo).

He is also responsible for my favorite (and very sobering) quote about astro imaging;

"There are as many schools of astrophotography as there are astrophotographers."

How true. Sure, there are best practices, but at the end of the day everything comes down to your own personal interpretation! Mastering image processing is about mastering the skills to create your interpretation, nothing more, nothing less.

[cloudbuster]

these really are very good for any attempt....let alone the first. would love to see your first attempt at my fave....M51.

[RikM]

Clipping is of course a big no-no, but I have to vehemently disagree with the black level clipping assertion Rik (and so do my histograms) - is your screen properly calibrated? I can see no black level clipping at all. Edit: I attached a version of M13 that has all its pixel levels multiplied by 10x - remember that 0 x 10 would still be 0 (e.g. black) but as you can see no pixel is perfectly black in this image.

I can't see any 'neon'-like clipping/glowing either, but maybe you were just speaking in general?

You're right of course that space is not perfectly black and, but as long as that is reflected in the image at whatever level (and it is in this case), then an image is 'correct' as far as I'm concerned.

As a matter of fact, I think Terry has done a decent job here with the data at hand. Looking at the raw data (which he posted above), the individual stars in the cluster didn't resolve all that well. The reduced resolution image as posted here almost makes up for the 'wandering' of the stars across multiple pixels. It could maybe use some sharpening, but all-in all I think this is a decent interpretation given the data.

Sorry all. May well be my screen. Histogram screen shot attached, is this a screen problem?

I certainly didn't mean to run the images down and I am sorry if my comments came across like that. I think Terry has done a great job, and I said that in my comments. In his OP he asked for suggestions. I was mearly trying to suggest things that I think would help make a good image better.

Speaking in general about the new M13 image, on my screens the sky is very black and the glob core is very bright. I think it would look better with a lighter sky background, more of the fainter stars brought out and the core part pushed back a bit. But if that impression is down to my screen callibration, then please let me know because I really want to help and want to improve my own images as well. I can't do that if my screen settings are screwy.

Everyone has different likes and dislikes about the aesthitics of images. As I said, some people like an ultra dark sky with very bright objects. I don't. That is just my opinion, everyone is free to ignore it.

[roundycat]

I cannot for the life of me see why so many get carried away by black skies and saturated stars and refer back to the histogram. When will you people learn to use the Info Palette in Photoshop? There you will find actual numbers that represent the various levels of brightness in the image. There is no guessing, no 'personal preference', no worries about monitor calibration and no dependance at all on the most innaccurate tool in the box.

Dennis

[RikM]

I cannot for the life of me see why so many get carried away by black skies and saturated stars and refer back to the histogram. When will you people learn to use the Info Palette in Photoshop? There you will find actual numbers that represent the various levels of brightness in the image. There is no guessing, no 'personal preference', no worries about monitor calibration and no dependance at all on the most innaccurate tool in the box.

Dennis

Do you mean this? I have only had CS3 for 2 days. I used Elements before that.

[terrym2002uk]

(post last image and hides under rock )

Ok, seriously this is the last image of the night I took. I really have tried not to over do it this time and make it look like a coal pit this time. So what do you think?

From my point of view and maybe other noobs it would be more helpful to demonstate your point by maybe reprocessing/correcting the image and explain how you achieved your point. This is the only way most people will learn, ie by practical example. I for one have no issue posting links to my stacked data, pre abused.

So here is its neonized coalpit glory is M27

(...climbs back under rock)

[Edit: Added second copy with a final bit of stretch]

[terrym2002uk]

Oh, that reminds me. I used to be a goth and trust me back comes in many shades and everyones is different.

[RikM]

(post last image and hides under rock )

Ok, seriously this is the last image of the night I took. I really have tried not to over do it this time and make it look like a coal pit this time. So what do you think?

From my point of view and maybe other noobs it would be more helpful to demonstate your point by maybe reprocessing/correcting the image and explain how you achieved your point. This is the only way most people will learn, ie by practical example. I for one have no issue posting links to my stacked data, pre abused.

So here is its neonized coalpit glory is M27

(...climbs back under rock)

[Edit: Added second copy with a final bit of stretch]

I think your stretched one is lovely.

I had quick tweak of your first version in between your posts and I think your second one is better than mine. It is smoother and still has loads of detail. I have increased the noise quite a bit as well and don't have time to fix it as I am at work. So I think I should stop offering advice on these threads.

Well done indeed.