My narrowband tone mapping approach in a video

[graemlourens]

Hi everybody.

I have been doing lots of tricolor narrowband targets using the tone mapping approach of J-P Metsavainio.
I slipped into tone mapping due to the fact that my ED80 gives me lots of nasty halos in SII & OIII and caused problems while processing.
As i've been doing this now for a while, i'm worried that i got used to bad habits and want to re-evaluate my steps i take to complete an image.

I'm very interested to share my process with others, in the hope to hear feedback on how they are doing things differently, if i'm making some logic mistakes in steps and how i could improve/optimize my workflow.
The second hope is that other people also share their screencast (can be a different target, but tricolor narrowband, does not have to be tone mapping, but without colour in stars as a result) in order to have a collection of different ways that also future people can use as a jumpstart to narrowband processing.

I used my latest data from the Pacman Nebula NGC281 and here is the result to start of with:

A few notes to the video/screencast:
- There is no audio, i didn't get round to commenting the video.
- I am starting with 3 calibrated and aligned masters.
- It is rather short (45 minutes), but in reality i would not go through steps so fast. Normally this process is done over several days and takes approx 3-4 hours per picture.
- The resulting image above is not the same end result as in the video. I tweaked lots of details at a later stage, but they are not crucial to the whole process.
- The places where i fade out / fade in, i am selecting files and i was not able to set everything up so it hides all my private details If anybody spots something private, please quickly PM me so i can remove it.

Here is the link: https://www.dropbox.com/s/t3pc3g6be557lom/Tonemap_Quickprocessing_Pacman.mp4?dl=0

I'm looking forward to comments on my processing path, and also contributions of others how they do things (video would be most welcome)

Kind regards, Graem

[graemlourens]

Hi Everybody.

I received the feedback that its pretty hard (booring) to watch the video without commentary or any kind of subtitles that actually comment on what i'm trying to do (or doing).

This is probably also why this thread is still empty - but i still hope in the meanwhile some of you can 'jump' through the video and see if my basic steps are similar to their processing, or if i'm doing some monkey business and you guys can stop me before i get used to doing things the 'wrong' way!

Kind regards, Graem

[carastro]

I started to look at it, but as it is in Pixinsight I stopped as I do everything in photoshop.  I agree about the no sound aspect too, difficult to see what you are doing.  

Nice of you to share your workflow to help others though. 

Carole 

[PatrickGilliland]

Hi Gream

First well done for making the effort to share your experience.

Some advice - sound would be useful yes but before that is added you need the WHAT, HOW and WHY (WHW) elements all dealt with.  The video deals with the how but does not tell me at any point what i am doing and why.  Thus it would be difficult for a first timer to digest what they are watching.  I would start with a list format of what we are going to do.  You can have section then that relate to this.

EG> Prepare image copies>X>Y>Z.  You can then tell the users before you do something what they will be doing.  A little narrative on the why E.G. We take a copy so we can use late ron for x.  It all helps piece the jigsaw together. If someone knows why they are doing it they will learn better than just following a script.

Few notes on the video.  Streaming quality was poor - i could not read the details on the screen and it was too fast.  The injection of the WHW data may help break it up, provide logical pause and check points also for the user to digest what is happening!

Its a good start but needs a little more thought around the presentation (feels like I am at work now reviewing one of my teams work  ).  

It does not need to be overkill, I gave a keynote speech to 7000 people in Seattle following just this approach.  What (am I talking about), How (does what i am talking about help you - with examples) and Why (why should you take action - or in this case run a processing stage).  Many other ways of approaching I am sure but I have found from experience the better the structure and more aligned to how people digest data the better it will be received/absorbed/learnt etc

The process is there now just need the additional elements to educate effectively

Don't be daunted by this - credit for attempting and with a little work this could be a very useful resource for many people.

Paddy

[graemlourens]

Hi @PatrickGilliland

Thank you for your feedback!

As soon as i got the first feedback saying its hard to watch without voiceover, it struck me as pretty obvious as well. I guess i didn't really think that far and just wanted to share to start a discussion. But my view on this was very subjective and i didn't consider you guys!

This is very new to me (making videos for public including voiceover) and its certainly not my strong suit, but I do like challenges so i'll take this one and complete the video with text & voiceover as soon as time allows it.
The WHW-Approach sounds very good, and further i'll review a few suggestions on how to make videos in general so they attract viewers. I think that certain people with youtube experience will certainly have knowledge to share in that department.

You'll hear from me again as soon as i'm ready!

Kind regards, Graem

[Rush]

Hi Graem,

Thanx for your NB mapping Video approach. Myself im a fan of J-P Metsavainios tone mapping.

There is Andy on Astrobin doing great images with this technique.

Im trying too get close to diffent mappings and have diifficulty mastering it.

Like Paddy says, its a bit difficult to follow fluently cos the immages you are adding and substracting are not quiet clear.

Need probably some headings like Starless HA or C.Mapped S2 and so on.

Eventhpough Im familiar with PI was hard to make out your movements in between Statastics and Histogram transformation.

Like the others ,im also of the same opininon add voice coverage, will be more easy for all.

nice work and  great image

CS

Rush

[swag72]

Had a looky Graeme and I have to say that as a PS user I switched off straight away LOL!!! Paddy's advice sounds good.......... I'm sure that you can take the points on board and make it a little more user friendly  ............ Not for me though I'm afraid LOL!

[graemlourens]

15 hours ago, Rush said:

Hi Graem,

Thanx for your NB mapping Video approach. Myself im a fan of J-P Metsavainios tone mapping.

There is Andy on Astrobin doing great images with this technique.

Im trying too get close to diffent mappings and have diifficulty mastering it.

Like Paddy says, its a bit difficult to follow fluently cos the immages you are adding and substracting are not quiet clear.

Need probably some headings like Starless HA or C.Mapped S2 and so on.

Eventhpough Im familiar with PI was hard to make out your movements in between Statastics and Histogram transformation.

Like the others ,im also of the same opininon add voice coverage, will be more easy for all.

nice work and  great image

CS

Rush

Hi Rush.

I understand totally, and like i said, in retrospect its pretty obvious i can not flood you guys with 45 minutes of clicking around, in my fast and scattered manner  Stay tuned, i'll get to it hopefully soon!

11 hours ago, swag72 said:

Had a looky Graeme and I have to say that as a PS user I switched off straight away LOL!!! Paddy's advice sounds good.......... I'm sure that you can take the points on board and make it a little more user friendly  ............ Not for me though I'm afraid LOL!

Hi Sara.

No worries i understand. But if you don't watch it, you're missing out the Photoshop Part where i go manually Halo-Hunting for around 10 Minutes and other i call 'photo-magic' things i can only do in photoshop!

Kind regards, Graem