Jump to content

stargazine_ep38_banner.thumb.jpg.6fe20536a22b28c17b2ee1818650993c.jpg

Preliminary test with Astra Image deconvolution


Recommended Posts

Just a side by side comparison

post-5655-0-74704600-1413406509.pngpost-5655-0-64229100-1413406526.png

The first image is processed in Registax 6, with my usual wavelet scheme, the second in Astra Image Plus 4.0. The latter with Lucy Richardson deconvolution 1.5 pixel Gaussian kernel and some 100 iterations with strength of 1.7 or so. I applied a gamma of 0.75 as well. The deconvolved image is clearly sharper, but the contrast of the finer detail is less strong (more natural, really)

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

I would say that having a "usual sharpening scheme" is a big mistake , even for my humble "white" stuff I find that no two days data is alike (today's being an extreme example ...  :p ) and I very rarely have the same wavelets settings from one day to the next .

Another great deconv program is "DStation" , as used by Harald Palaske on his mindblowing solar close-ups , extremely tunable an multi-optioned.

https://github.com/blackhaz/DStation

I would also suggest that you knock the bottom three or four Wavelet sliders over to the far left and use only the top two small radius sliders , with a gentle touch , to bring out the finer detail , the bottom large radius controls ruin many of the images I see posted across various sites .

Edited by Steve Ward
Link to post
Share on other sites

I would say that having a "usual sharpening scheme" is a big mistake , even for my humble "white" stuff I find that no two days data is alike (today's being an extreme example ...  :p ) and I very rarely have the same wavelets settings from one day to the next .

Another great deconv program is "DStation" , as used by Harald Palaske on his mindblowing solar close-ups , extremely tunable an multi-optioned.

https://github.com/blackhaz/DStation

I would also suggest that you knock the bottom three or four Wavelet sliders over to the far left and use only the top two small radius sliders , with a gentle touch , to bring out the finer detail , the bottom large radius controls ruin many of the images I see posted across various sites .

I wasn't being clear. I typically use a base scheme as starting point, and tweak that until it is (visually) optimal. I do notice I rarely deviate very much from the base settings I stored. That is what I meant by usual wavelet scheme. I actually find my few white-light images require more experimentation than my H-alpha.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

A little unsharp masking in GIMP  improves the result:

post-5655-0-76429600-1413446194.png

Wavelets (used curves to match tonal range)

post-5655-0-71628900-1413446182.png

Original LR deconvolution

post-5655-0-37480200-1413446133.png

LR deconvolution with unsharp masking (default settings)

post-5655-0-12248300-1413446148.png

LR deconvolution with unsharp masking (more aggressive)

The latter is perhaps a bit too strong. Incidentally, the image processing toolbox in MatLab does support LR deconvolution, so I might well see if I can write a script to do the deconvolution of all the panes

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Right, another good comparison.

I have had a fiddle this morning with 3.0 and am I right in thinking you can't save it in the free version?

Might have to bite the bullet.

edit: Just found you have to use the license Key.

Edited by JB80
Link to post
Share on other sites

Right, another good comparison.

I have had a fiddle this morning with 3.0 and am I right in thinking you can't save it in the free version?

Might have to bite the bullet.

edit: Just found you have to use the license Key.

You do need a licensed version in order to save the images. I got the 4.0 Plus variant. Quite cheap really.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I thinks it's too early in the day for me, I was wondering why I had the key but hadn't been asked for it. Sorted now.

It is quite cheap so I'm playing around with 3.0 to see if I will go ahead and get 4.0, stick with 3.0 or PS. It's a close call so far.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Bliley....every one is going Astra Image crazy!

Personally I haven't seen that much improvement on disc detail compared to multiple iterations of Unsharp Mask (about 10-15 consecutive repetitions of very gentle UM). It really comes into its own on faint proms though

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Excellent comparisons :) :) :)

I think the main point is that wavelets are just too harsh for solar processing and not a good method. The Sun does not have hard edges, it is a soft ball of flowing plasma and so usual wavelets have a hard time and tend to bring out hard edges where there is none. Using a mild deconvolution method or Smart sharpen is a very gentle way and will just bring focus without creating false hard lines or halos. I don't think it matters which you use, everyone has different equipment and different cameras have different levels of noise. Just be gentle, less is more, go for the real fluffy look, not the hard sharp edges look :)

Alexandra

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • 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.