Jump to content

Stargazers Lounge Uses Cookies

Like most websites, SGL uses cookies in order to deliver a secure, personalised service, to provide social media functions and to analyse our traffic. Continued use of SGL indicates your acceptance of our cookie policy.

sgl_imaging_challenge_banner_android_vs_ios_winners.thumb.jpg.803608cf7eedd5cfb31eedc3e3f357e9.jpg

gnomus

Heart Nebula Reprocess

Recommended Posts

I thought I would have a go at reprocessing the data from Les Granges.  The original is here: https://stargazerslounge.com/topic/280787-heart-nebula-from-les-granges/

To make the exercise worthwhile, I decided I would just use the data that we captured whilst at Les Granges and not add in the additional Ha and RGB that Olly had from a previous time.  This allowed me to present the original framing.  Every time I add Ha (or OIII) into an image it comes out differently.  It is quite different from the earlier effort, I think.  This is Olly's dual Takahashi rig over 2 nights:

3 hours of RGB

4 hours 15 mins Luminance

11 hours Ha

Total = 18.25 hours

LRGB_Combo3x1920.jpg

Edited by gnomus
  • Like 12

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The plentiful data has given you a beautiful and smooth image.  I like it.

Just need to nudge left for the companion now :happy6:.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, Barry-Wilson said:

The plentiful data has given you a beautiful and smooth image.  I like it.

Just need to nudge left for the companion now :happy6:.

Nudge left - then nudge down - then nudge back right again to fill in the missing panel......    I suppose I am going back next year...

Edited by gnomus

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So much more going on than you realize until you zoom into the full image.  It is extraordinary.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Great image. The second version is better imo. There is some very nice detail in and around the cluster in the center of the heart. That could make a great image of its own, with the right focal length and sensor size.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you Paddy.  However, I think I overdid the RGB stretch somewhat in the earlier versions and was playing catch up from that point forward.  After several more hours I have come up with this....

HaLRGB_V4_FIN4_CROP_BN.jpg

Edited by gnomus

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, gnomus said:

Thank you Paddy.  However, I think I overdid the RGB stretch somewhat in the earlier versions and was playing catch up from that point forward.  After several more hours I have come up with this....

 

My bad but like the colours better in earlier version for the stars - just need that with the control of the second one now ;) should keep you up a little longer.....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, PatrickGilliland said:

My bad but like the colours better in earlier version for the stars - just need that with the control of the second one now ;) should keep you up a little longer.....

You're breaking my heart Paddy (literally!!!)  I had deliberately toned down the non-cluster stars in order not to draw attention away from the nebula.  I've amped them back up a bit in this version.  Which is best?  There's only one way to find out ..... 

HaLRGB_V5_FIN_PADDY_STARS.jpg

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I Like this - maybe a little less blue stars but prefer the reds and yellows :) (that is what i preferred in first version, reds and yellows gave it another aspect and toning those down I felt was a loss).

Paddy

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Second one for me. The final two have the nebulosity a bit on the flat side for my taste but I'm a bit gung-ho on my contrasts.

I've continued to chip away at the 25 hour one we processed together. I wonder what you felt about the effect of the extra data? My feeling was that you just couldn't kill it. It would take some really heavyweight crowbar work in curves. I'll send you the latest version via Dropbox to see what you think.

This is very, very nice data to work with, though.

Olly

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
55 minutes ago, ollypenrice said:

Second one for me. The final two have the nebulosity a bit on the flat side for my taste but I'm a bit gung-ho on my contrasts.

I've continued to chip away at the 25 hour one we processed together. I wonder what you felt about the effect of the extra data? My feeling was that you just couldn't kill it. It would take some really heavyweight crowbar work in curves. I'll send you the latest version via Dropbox to see what you think.

This is very, very nice data to work with, though.

Olly

Thanks Olly.  The second version is a little too - what's the word - 'brittle' for my taste at 100%.  Furthermore, I found some odd artefacts from the 'Increase Star Color' Action.  What was happening was that there were groups of close together stars, and when I ran the action I would get a pink/red colour appearing between them.  I'd never noticed anything like that before.  

47 minutes ago, swag72 said:

Nice star colour and great nebulosity - I like this a lot :)

Do you have a preference as to which version, Sara?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, gnomus said:

Do you have a preference as to which version, Sara?

I like the second one, but with slightly smaller stars of the third :) You've got some very nice star colour there ..... 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, gnomus said:

Alright.  Back to Photoshop then it seems.  :icon_geek:

No.... no.... you pick something that you like, not something that suits everyone else :)

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, swag72 said:

No.... no.... you pick something that you like, not something that suits everyone else :)

Ha ha.  No worries.  It is very interesting to hear people's views on my photos (even if I don't always agree with them).  Constructive criticism is always positive, and it helps me to re-think my own views on the pictures.    

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Very nice indeed, For me also its the second one,

they all have there merits though.

well done

Paul

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Very nice result! I strongly believe your second re-process is the best one. Don't fade the stars in this target. Star colour make beautiful this frame :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

OK - I've had another go at this one.  I agree that I over-subdued the stars too much in later iterations.  I managed to get the reds a bit more like I was aiming for too in this version:

Ha_LRGB_P6x1800.jpg

Edited by gnomus
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • Similar Content

    • By MartinB
      This has been a bit of a project.  Last year I worked out that my 200mm Canon F2.8 lens and ASI1600 would frame the whole of the Veil complex quite nicely.  I captured Ha and OIII data for the east and west nebulae with a Tak FSQ 106 and added this into the widefield image.  Although the Tak data had to be shrunk down it did add a bit of extra resolution where it was needed.  
      The difficulty for me has been the processing.  I have found it really difficult to tease out the faint wisps of detail and have tried the usual routines of micro contrast adjustments using curves along with Scott Rosen's Screen blend/mask inversion method but the results weren't great owing to the close proximity of faint and bright nebulosity.  I'd heard about the PI process tool for removing stars, Starnet, so loaded this and had a rare foray into PI.  This proved very helpful.  It was a luminence created from Ha and OIII using the 200mm lens with the Tak data mixed in.  Then the starless layer was added in PS with the screen blend mode at 50% opacity.  The nebulosity detail was so well preserved I didn't need a mask.  After blending I reduced the stars a bit more using the starless layer again and darken as the blend at 50%.  I should really unleash some of the stars to add a bit of "punch" but I've wrestled with this data enough for now!  I plan to use it further as I look deeper into the Gorgon that is PixInsight!
      Telescope: Tak 106 for E and W veils.  Canon 200mmL lens
      Camera: ZWO ASI 1600 pro mono cmos, Gain 150, offset 50
      Filters: Baader 7nm OIII and Ha
      E+W Veil 10x30 mins each channel for each nebula.  Whole complex 50x5mins for each channel
      Captured with SGP, calibrated, aligned and combined with PI, processed mainly with PS but PI for Starnet.  Ha mapped to red and OIII to both blue and green

       
    • By MarsG76
      The Omega Nebula, aka The swan Nebula, M17/NGC6618 imaged in Narrowband and combined in Hubble palette style. The photo was imaged with a astromodded and cooled DSLR through a 8" SCT across multiple networks gets from 28 July - 8 August 2019.
    • By MarsG76
      The Omega Nebula, aka The swan Nebula, M17/NGC6618 imaged in Narrowband hAo3hB as RGB. The photo was imaged with a astromodded and cooled DSLR through a 8" SCT across multiple networks gets from 28 July - 4 August 2019.
    • By GWalles
      This is currently a work in progress. Playing around with Photoshop CC to try and extract more detail from this image. This image is not as cropped as the others I have posted.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.