NGC 281 - Pacman Nebula - Hubble Palette

[gnomus]

Last night I was able to get an unbroken run and get hold of 5 hours of SII to go with the 5 hours of Ha and OIII I had already got for my bicolour Pacman - https://stargazerslounge.com/topic/278251-ngc-281-pacman-nebula-bicolour/

The SII signal was pretty faint in comparison to the Ha and OIII.  I also have no real idea how to go about processing these things so a great deal of trial and error was required.  Bob Franke's method was sort of what I followed - http://www.bf-astro.com/hubbleP.htm

I don't know how 'wild' I should go with the colours in these things.  I tried for a colourful but 'semi-realistic' effect.  I don't know if I achieved that.  The background is a bit darker than is usually recommended.  I tried it with a 'lighter' background but, for some reason, I kept coming back to the version I've posted.  I am open to any suggestions - well clean ones anyway.....

[PhotoGav]

Steve, the middle of the pic I like very much, the edge however, not so much! You have lost all the detail in the surrounding areas that was present in your bicolour version. That one emerged gently from the darkness, but this one is a bit abrupt. Ideally at this stage I would give you a set of suggestions on how to solve the issue, but I'm not exactly sure what to recommend other than go a little gentler and not so dark! I would be interested to see your 'lighter' version.

Another interesting HST processing method tutorial is here: http://istarion.net/Picturepages/Processing/Modified hubble/Modified hubble.shtml

[gnomus]

Thanks Gav.  I think you are probably right.  I may have brutalised the data too much in an attempt to emulate some of the Hubble Palette images I have seen elsewhere.  Here is a less processed and 'lighter' version.

[gnomus]

Or perhaps this:

[ollypenrice]

I think it's perfectly normal to have a darker background in NB images than in LRGB. As ever, you just have to watch like a hawk that you haven't black clipped any faint modelling in the dark stuff. I really like the colour of the background sky in this, a neutral dusky darkness. This sets the nebular colours in a good context.

Olly

[PhotoGav]

Excellent, definite improvements. The nebula is starting to emerge gently from the background and that I like!

[gnomus]

When playing around with this data I came across a suggestion for blending as follows: Red - 50% Ha, 50% SII; Green - 0.15% Ha, 0.85% OIII; and Blue - 100% OIII.  It looks very different to the Hubble - indeed it looks like a slightly enhanced version of my bicolour attempt:

[PhotoGav]

That's gorgeous, I love the red colours and the detail is spectacular. There's real depth to the central portion. It's a shame not to get the OIII blues of the Hubble image in there too though.

[PatrickGilliland]

Aha as I suspected the SII for me makes the image.  The latter version is a nice variation but V2 SHO if very nice.  I think you can keep the brightness and be more aggressive with colour tones but then i am not known for being subtle  

Great work.

 

Paddy

[gnomus]

13 hours ago, PatrickGilliland said:

Aha as I suspected the SII for me makes the image.  The latter version is a nice variation but V2 SHO if very nice.  I think you can keep the brightness and be more aggressive with colour tones but then i am not known for being subtle  

Great work.

 

Paddy

Thanks all for your continued help with this.  And thanks Paddy for your suggestion (see below).  My this narrowband imaging is difficult.  When I set about compiling my effort, I looked for example images on t'Internet.  Here is an APOD image that I found, that stuck out as something I should perhaps be shooting for: http://apod.nasa.gov/apod/ap141128.html

Then I had doubts about whether I should be going for the 'amped up' look or not - I seem to have had more success when going for 'subdued'.  So I wasn't sure what direction to take.  Following Paddy's suggestion, I tried to get more aggressive with the colour tones and I attach this as version 1.  Then I thought I'd go all out and try to match the tones in the APOD image, using big changes in 'Selective Colour'.  I don't know what to make of the second revision.  In some ways adding the extra colour seems to have made the fainter stuff more visible because it now has colour rather than just being grey.  But is it too much?   (Or perhaps folks prefer one of the earlier versions?)

Version 1

Version 2

[PhotoGav]

Steve, it's fascinating to see this one develop and I really like the direction you have taken it in. For me, version 2 with its bolder colour palette works very well. The outer dust regions are far more evident and that is good. For the record - I prefer your field of view to the APOD image that you linked to. The APOD does win on clarity though, which makes me wonder if you could get away with a bit more careful and selective sharpening? It's a lovely image though, well done!

[swag72]

I like where this is going Steve and the changes have been interesting to see. It's great to see such contrast in the middle as I've always thought it can end up looking rather flat - You've done well and created a very nice image indeed

[gnomus]

Thanks Gav for inspiring me to look again at this.   It has had very little sharpening (I have done some LCE obviously, and wanted to tread carefully).

5 minutes ago, swag72 said:

I like where this is going Steve and the changes have been interesting to see. It's great to see such contrast in the middle as I've always thought it can end up looking rather flat - You've done well and created a very nice image indeed

Thanks for commenting Sara.  'Where it is going' - damn - I'd hoped it was finished!  

Do you have a preference as regards V1 or V2 in my last post?  I know I should be looking to develop my own style and all that, but I really have very little experience of NB imaging - this is only my second attempt at Hubble Palette, and the first attempt was a bit of a mess.... 

 

[PatrickGilliland]

5 hours ago, gnomus said:

Thanks all for your continued help with this.  And thanks Paddy for your suggestion (see below).  My this narrowband imaging is difficult.  When I set about compiling my effort, I looked for example images on t'Internet.  Here is an APOD image that I found, that stuck out as something I should perhaps be shooting for: http://apod.nasa.gov/apod/ap141128.html

Then I had doubts about whether I should be going for the 'amped up' look or not - I seem to have had more success when going for 'subdued'.  So I wasn't sure what direction to take.  Following Paddy's suggestion, I tried to get more aggressive with the colour tones and I attach this as version 1.  Then I thought I'd go all out and try to match the tones in the APOD image, using big changes in 'Selective Colour'.  I don't know what to make of the second revision.  In some ways adding the extra colour seems to have made the fainter stuff more visible because it now has colour rather than just being grey.  But is it too much?   (Or perhaps folks prefer one of the earlier versions?)

 

Well thats a bit more disco  - I like that added enough without pushing too far. I like it but my advice would be stick to what you feel is right.  Your  data your rules  

You have AP fashion i guess and that simply means different folk have different views depending on various criteria. Ultimately all nice images so doing what you feel best presents the data is what is key.

Paddy 

[gnomus]

Thanks again Paddy.  I like Disco but prefer Country and Western (I hope that ain't too obscure).  The more I look at it the more I like the second 'pushed to 11' version.  So long as folks don't think it is excessive, I think I will leave it at that.

[gnomus]

I really must get out more:

[toxic]

thats a real beaut Steve great image

[PhotoGav]

Steve, I think you've nailed it with this latest rendition, well done! As for getting out more... yes, definitely, with the scope on a clear night to take more images like this!!!

[gnomus]

OK - Done Now.  I cropped out that overly bright star on the right.  Improved the SII.  And one or two minor tweaks: