Jump to content

SkySurveyBanner.jpg.21855908fce40597655603b6c9af720d.jpg

Jupiter processing challenge.


Space Cowboy

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 70
  • Created
  • Last Reply

It is interesting seeing all these results from the same data. I agree with you Neil about my image being a bit on the dark side and to be honest it's due to me being a bit cautious of other monitors being brighter. I remenber that issue I had with a Saturn from last year where you & Freddie were picking something up in the background that I just coudn't see on my monitor. From then on I probably hold back a bit to ensure that things don't look too bright on other screens.

I have made a few minor adjustments so hopefully this will look a littIe better from that point of view. 

Pete.

Looks a lot better with the raised levels.

From a detail perspective, It certainly is better than my effort.. With enough time I wonder if I could figure a similar way.

It certainly looks like a method you use a lot from the similar appearance to your images. It explains how your getting so much pole detail. My only concern here is, the colour looks odd. and a little un natural. But I cant argue with the detail, lots are completely missing in my image. Now I feel like experimenting. Looks to me like you have used a red channel heavily processed possibly with increase contrast. Think I will experiment to see if can do something similar. Its a clever  process Pete.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Stuart,

can't decide if this is a sly trick to offload the processing, an elite competence test to benchmark skills or a competition you have yet to announce the grand prize for ;)

All tongue in cheek and no suggestion of nefarious intent!

However it's an extremely interesting, informative and fun thread - great idea and I shall have my own stab to make everyone else look good.

Neil suggested someone putting up an image for folk to experiment so i'm just an innocent party in this though admittedly adding a competitive edge. :cool:

I've only seen these images on my netbook so far but will be firing up the pc tonight to post up my own version and draw up a final analysis. I shall select the "winners" taking into account detail, natural quality and artistic impression. Purely on my own preferences as it is my image.  :smiley: 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Looks a lot better with the raised levels.

From a detail perspective, It certainly is better than my effort.. With enough time I wonder if I could figure a similar way.

It certainly looks like a method you use a lot from the similar appearance to your images. It explains how your getting so much pole detail. My only concern here is, the colour looks odd. and a little un natural. But I cant argue with the detail, lots are completely missing in my image. Now I feel like experimenting. Looks to me like you have used a red channel heavily processed possibly with increase contrast. Think I will experiment to see if can do something similar. Its a clever  process Pete.

Yes agree Neil reg colour. It's probably the area I have found the trickiest during this fun exercise using Stuarts data. Trying to pull everything together is the hardest task of all for us imagers, but I definately feel there is too much red in the mix looking at it now. So final submission and that' s me done  :grin:

It been fascinating!!

Pete

post-22012-0-20862900-1389979380.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Started tweaking my first post. really should re do from scratch as its more of a patch job otherwise. But anyway wanted to see if I could pull more pole detail out. Not sure I like it. But there is more detail. If im not careful this will get OCD. As I get intrigued when I see something that requires a different type of process. And Petes is certainly that. Splitting the channels helps. Enough from me now. But I bet ill experiment more. If there has to be a winner. Then my vote goes to Pete.

As long as I get a blue peter badge. As a consolation prize

post-2700-0-41175800-1389984025.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This has been a great thread - brilliant to see all the different processing techniques of the same image on the one thread. I'd say all of them have merit and hopefully we have all learned something here!! Ok this is my final version (eh probably..) with maybe slightly more colour and detail... well that was the plan anyway!!  :smiley:

post-4224-0-28090300-1389986620.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Okay, here's my second and final version...

post-31280-0-99293700-1389989498.jpg

Tried to get more detail over the poles but the more I push it the less natural it looks so backed off a little. Really enjoyed this thread - really been food for thought for image processing on a cloudy Friday night!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ok, thanks guys for your fantastic response to this thread with many different versions posted!

I've done 3 versions myself. The 1st is what I originally posted back in November but I downsized it then and afterwards stacked more frames and debayered using billinear in pipp which produces a smoother image and this is what became my final processed image (including all the moons) :

http://stargazerslounge.com/topic/205235-jupiter-grs-nov-15th-2013-repro/

The 2nd image is using same wavelets (Gaussian/ linear) but then adding some deconvolution in image analyser.

3rd image uses stronger denoise/sharpening Gaussian/linear wavelets which I used to use with my DFK but find too strong for the QHY cam producing more bloated detail (I did give this one an extra push).

post-4016-0-56596000-1389992576.png

post-4016-0-33832900-1389992593.png

post-4016-0-85749400-1389992618.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My favourite images were posted by Ralph, Steve, James, Neil and of course Pete who found detail I did not realise existed!

I'm not going to bash individuals but I chose this image because of its decent quality and GRS but also the moon and transit shadow. Some images have been over sharpened which especially effects the transit shadow burning the edges and producing a halo effect. Pete's image has the extra pop but without over cooking the shadow which is especially impressive.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks to everyone involved, been a great challenge indeed. Picked up many tips and my images are looking so much better.

Stuart - Great job, organising, facilitating and closing.

I have referenced this thread in my blog, as it is such a great point of reference for those that are starting out on this journey.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

An excellent exercise absolutely and thanks Stuart for donating one of your many superb images to the pack!! :laugh:  Really interesting to see peoples' different takes and great practice.

                        Best regards,

                                               Ralph

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thank you for the opportunity  to do a bit of planetary processing. I started last Feb and have not done any planetary since last April, May, I think. Anyway here is my attemp and I have done my best not to euin oyur capture, hope you approve. Wavelets with mask in RG6 and some messing about with and noise in StarTools, ST is actually my main DSO imaging software.

Regards,

A.G

post-28808-0-16116300-1390057866.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My favourite images were posted by Ralph, Steve, James, Neil and of course Pete who found detail I did not realise existed!

I'm not going to bash individuals but I chose this image because of its decent quality and GRS but also the moon and transit shadow. Some images have been over sharpened which especially effects the transit shadow burning the edges and producing a halo effect. Pete's image has the extra pop but without over cooking the shadow which is especially impressive.

Thanks Stuart for starting this little experiment, as said it's been great fun and I'm sure everyone has gotten something from the thread - and for me to be mentioned in the same sentence as 4 of the top planetary imagers (5 including yourself) on here has made my day!!  :cool:  :smiley:

Cheers

Steve

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks again guys for making this such an interesting thread with all your processing input.

Not sure I will be using a phone for processing just yet Knobby but thats a very quirky version. :smiley:

Nice detail coming out on that version A.G just gotta watch the noise level.  I tend to stop pushing sharpening as soon as noise starts to kick in so things can easily be smoothed out later on. Check out my image analyser tutorial :

http://stargazerslounge.com/topic/162217-processing-jupiter-with-image-analyser-tutorial/?hl=%2Bimage+%2Banalyser+%2Btutorial#entry1749460

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue. By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.