This is going to hurt!

[Daniel-K]

Ive been away from astronomy for while now and before my absence i was strictly visual.

now  im on my way back im getting into AP again. ive managed to rescue some old data from my broken laptop and transferred it to my new laptop. now i have just tried to redo my work flow and try and reprocess my m45 data i got about 5 years ago and it hasn't gone down well. i have completely forgot what to do 

this weekend i should be picking up a 414ex and a Rc6 with a feather touch. 

hoping to have my mount and gear ready for SGL.

The image below was when i knew how to wing it. 

i hope i can pick up CCD imaging as easy as i did DLSR but with the effort ive just had im a little scared. 

 

ITS GOOD TO BE BACK!

 

 

[estwing]

Auspom's the only expert I know on this subject!...welcome back Dan to whatever keeps you on the scene!

[swag72]

Welcome back to the fold  I'm sure that you'll remember all of the processing stuff in no time

[Scott]

12 minutes ago, estwing said:

Auspom's the only expert I know on this subject!...welcome back Dan to whatever keeps you on the scene!

Bahaha...I nearly peed myself reading that calv. what I know most proper imagers have forgotten mate

[RikM]

Plenty of opportunity to get some tips at SGL 11 Dan  

[Physopto]

Nice image!

 

Derek

[Chris]

It's good to have you back aboard SGL which ever side of astronomy you're focusing on Dan 

 

[ollypenrice]

Yes, good to see you back. You'll be able to get a few people to share their workflows with you, I'm sure, but one thing I always stress when tutoring AP is the need to keep looking at the image. It will show you what it needs once you've trained your eye to look carefully. The process won't always be the same because each image is different. I'm always baffled when I see people asking how to automate a workflow. It's impossible, if you want to get the best out of your data. Some images are dominated by faint signal, some by strong and the difficult ones have lots of both. Some like a gentle stretch, some an aggressive one, and, again, some need both (to be combined in layers.) And so on.

Pesonally I see it as a game of two skill sets. 1) An eye for what's right and wrong with an image. 2) A knowledge of the processing tools available to you. Once you have those you'll know what to do.

Olly

[michael.h.f.wilkinson]

Automating workflows is fine when you need consistency, which is paramount when you need to measure stuff. The Sloan Digital Sky Survey and the like use an automated workflow. When you have dozens (like my big mosaics), hundreds,  thousands, or even millions of images to process you need automation. If you want to get the most out of relatively few images visually then automation is going to be rather less useful.