quick repro using dyadic wavlets instead of linear....

[eyepod]

Thanks of course to Neil for this advice,

After reading his guide I thought i might have a very quick play reprocessing by best Jupiter from the 8th

I'm pleased with the extra detail changing the wavlets to dyadic has revealed. You have to go very gently with them though!!!

thanks Neil.

Have you ever thought of writing a book on CCD planetary imaging/processing....??? I think you would definitely sell enough to buy that C11...!!

Jason

[cgarry]

Very interesting! That is possibly the one thing that I have not played with.

Cheers,

Chris

[eyepod]

Aarrrrggghhhhh forgot to say left one is dyadic, right one is linear.... they have got to bring back the editor....!!!!!!!!!

[neil phillips]

Thanks of course to Neil for this advice,

After reading his guide I thought i might have a very quick play reprocessing by best Jupiter from the 8th

I'm pleased with the extra detail changing the wavlets to dyadic has revealed. You have to go very gently with them though!!!

thanks Neil.

Have you ever thought of writing a book on CCD planetary imaging/processing....??? I think you would definitely sell enough to buy that C11...!!

Jason

Hi Jason Actually i did think about it. I got advice from another member on here, how best to go about it. But thats as far as i went. To be honest. if i did do anything like that. I think it would have to be geared towards beginners. But theres so much good information available free on the net. That it seems rather mute. to me.

Out of interest what did you think of using dyadic. Its very strong isnt it. with really only wavelet two being the most useful. ( or perhaps a tiny amount of wavelet 3 ) for bold contrast larger features. I think i really started using it. mainly because of weak data. As it gets you seeing whats really there fast doesnt it. Its great for weak data. Though as mentioned i felt dyadic and linear can look very similar anyway. Depending how its used. With linear i tend to use wavlets 2, 3 and 4 in a stepped process. in that way. it looks very similar to wavelet two dyadic just on its own.

I should add i still use linear for lunar. Infact i even break the rules with that. The recent clavius shot i used wavelet 1 Which is seen as a no no. Because of the high noise it produces. but with careful noise reduction using image analyzers frequency domain filter. i can get the very fine appearance for tiny craters. Without a trace of noise. It really works. Or i should say did when i tried it recently on clavius. I have used it in the past. i cant remember where. Almost certainly lunar

Both your redos here look nice to me. I think they are a improvement. And a couple of really nice early Jupiters. Any idea what caused the colour differences.

[SeedyF]

Hmm, this is interesting - I'll have to give it a try with the couple of Jupiters I captured, but am a bit disappointed with, at the weekend.

PS - I seem to be able to edit posts, but I've seen a few people grumbling that they can't - what's going on???

[Space Cowboy]

Both images have their own charm. You could say the 2nd one looks more natural.

I reckon if Neil charged ten quid a throw processing peoples images he'd soon pay for a c14.

[neil phillips]

Both images have their own charm. You could say the 2nd one looks more natural.

I reckon if Neil charged ten quid a throw processing peoples images he'd soon pay for a c14.

However much i would love a C14. I couldnt do that Stuart. £12.50 at least. He he

Hey we are Editing again. Cheers Mods. Just tested it here.

[michael.h.f.wilkinson]

I like the dyadic one best. They are tricky, and a lot of trial and error is involved in getting it right. Very nice result you have got there

Editing is available for "advanced members" (250+ posts) in a 30 minute time slot after posting