Need an opinion

[Jupiterholic]

Hi all,

I've recently been experimenting with my processing techniques. I have a tendency to stack a lot of frames and push hard on the wavelets. Consequently I was starting to feel my mosaics were a little unnatural looking. So I tried reprocessing one by stacking just the best couple of hundred (of approx 3,000 frames) and gently waveletting them. The result is below. On the left is the softer, potentially more natural looking one and on the right is the heavily sharpened original done by using lots of frames from each avi (so effectively... sharpening bad data)

If anyones still reading and could let me know which one they prefer it would be much appreciated.

Many thanks

Uploaded with ImageShack.us

[todd8137]

Hi there ,they are both great images,what you have to ask your self is this,do you do images to please others ,or your self ? stick to your own style.they both great do things to suite your self instead of the mass`s.keep up the fantastic work

[Jupiterholic]

Hi there ,they are both great images,what you have to ask your self is this,do you do images to please others ,or your self ?

Thanks Todd,

Thats an interesting question. I think the honest answer is a little of both. Otherwise why would we post our images here if we didn't want them to be appealing to others aswell as ourselves?

You're right that everyone has a style to their imaging and one is as valid as the next, however, when I look at the work of top imagers such as Stefan Lammel, Damien Peach and Pete Lawrence I've noticed that they all work towards a very natural look thats unquestionably 'softer' than mine, yet still packed with detail. I'm just working through a period where I'm questioning if mine are natural or over processed as I still very much class myself as 'learning'. As I'm sure I always will.

Admittedly their equipment and experience far outranks mine but I know a lot about image processing and am pretty sure aperture, and even perhaps the camera isn't always the issue. I think its sometimes in the processing. And the seeing

[shellfish]

Which image do you prefer????

Pick your favorite and this is your style then try and make the best images in this style perfecting what you like and enjoy..... Most people are just pleased you choose to share them with us

[Jupiterholic]

oh dear, these aren't quite the answers I was hoping for. I like them both. Thats part of the problem. Just wondered if people notice things like the 'natural look' that I'm researching. Perhaps not. Perhaps you're right and it should just be about picking a style. If so, I may indeed pick my more natural style.

[shellfish]

LMAO here is the cat for your pigeons then...... My personal preference is the more detailed one...... I like the crispness of the image and the detail..... I think the more romantic people will like the natural look and the more scientific will like the detailed approach...... now its your choice :)

Hope that was more what you needed

[Jupiterholic]

indeed it is. Thanks mate, cat amongst the pigeons indeed

And a very interesting theory for why some would prefer one look to the other.

[symesie04]

Hmm tough one. Think i prefer the contrast on the left but prefer the sharpness on the right. Maybe somewhere in between would be nice Maybe add a little contrast to the one on the right, either with curves or using dodge and burn in PS.

[northcanadian]

Hi

I prefer the one on the right because of the wider range of darker grey values

Cheers

[Jupiterholic]

Thanks guys.

I'd predicted many people would prefer the left, but turns out thats not the way its going, here or amongst others I've asked.

Hmmmm...

Many thanks for taking the time to comment.

[Zakalwe]

Absolutely the right hand image. The Moon isn't soft...it's craggy, full of sharp edges, peaks, and fractured rock. The RH image has lots more detail in Doppelmayer and the smaller craters in the Mare Humorum. Also, you can see the lava flows much, much better in the sharper image.

I do know what you mean about the processing though....sometime I see fantastic, sharp images, but the processing is evident...almost like there is a double image on some craters....this image from Damien Peach is what I mean...it's almost like a blurred double image:

[riklaunim]

The "double" shadow is diffraction pattern that will show up at high resolution on some planetary or lunary edges:

Imaging Artefacts: Diffraction pattern artefacts

It can be limited, removed by post processing or sometimes limited by softer sharpening. That's why for example f/10 Moon shots will be edge-sharp while f/20 will be softer due to that artifact.

[Starlight 1]

Well for me the one on right .

[Jupiterholic]

Absolutely the right hand image. The Moon isn't soft...it's craggy, full of sharp edges, peaks, and fractured rock. The RH image has lots more detail in Doppelmayer and the smaller craters in the Mare Humorum. Also, you can see the lava flows much, much better in the sharper image.

I do know what you mean about the processing though....sometime I see fantastic, sharp images, but the processing is evident...almost like there is a double image on some craters....this image from Damien Peach is what I mean...it's almost like a blurred double image:

Yes! This is an effect I've noticed too. Thanks to Riklaunim for explaining that. The double image effect has never appealed to me it must be said.

Thanks again all those who've passed a verdict. Much appreciated.

[Zakalwe]

The "double" shadow is diffraction pattern that will show up at high resolution on some planetary or lunary edges:

Imaging Artefacts: Diffraction pattern artefacts

It can be limited, removed by post processing or sometimes limited by softer sharpening. That's why for example f/10 Moon shots will be edge-sharp while f/20 will be softer due to that artifact.

Thanks for explaining that. I always find that effect extremely distracting...its almost hard to focus on the image.

[nightfisher]

I would prefer the one on the left, but im not a fan of "dark" lunar shots, i posted a webcam shot from the other night but had to "lighten" it a fair amount before posting

[nmoushon]

I also like the one on the right. Love looking at all the detail in the walls and edges of craters and I think making it a "darker" moon helps bring it out more. But again thats me. You should do what you like best.

[Sierra Golf Mike]

Sorry, I'm sitting on the fence here, I think the best would be little sharper on the left image but not as much as the right. Both are nice images though and at a quality that I can't get near yet, so much practice required at both capture and processing. Keep up the good work.

Cheers