ollypenrice Posted December 28, 2016 Share Posted December 28, 2016 Anyone tried this? In favour: it's very beautiful. Against: it's very low from European locations, even here at Lat 44. It's very faint. As in very. It also lies on the geostationary satellite equivalent of the M25. Call it five trails per sub if you're lucky. Fifteen if you're not.* It is attractive in both colour and structure so there are no short cuts. You need a lot of luminance and a lot (oh yesss...) of colour. I am hoping to finish it one day but, at sixty three, I feel I should have started this as a young man... * Why are these satellites predominantly green? lly PS As usual, this is O'Donoghue's fault! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tim Posted December 28, 2016 Share Posted December 28, 2016 Have you got a pic Olly? It's one for that Namibia trip isn't it? :/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Starlight 1 Posted December 28, 2016 Share Posted December 28, 2016 he gone back to NGC2170 to get it . he be 100063 time he get back. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PatrickGilliland Posted December 29, 2016 Share Posted December 29, 2016 2 hours ago, ollypenrice said: Anyone tried this Hi Olly - Tried this a year ago. In hindsight less NR and a touch more refinement would have been nice in the processing but here was my first attempt. May go back and reprocess now you have highlighted it again. It is worth persevering though - if I could get this out of the data a year ago (when I really had little idea what i was doing!) then i suspect there is something nice hiding in there Paddy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ollypenrice Posted December 29, 2016 Author Share Posted December 29, 2016 11 hours ago, Tim said: Have you got a pic Olly? Coming soon... 8 hours ago, PatrickGilliland said: Hi Olly - Tried this a year ago. In hindsight less NR and a touch more refinement would have been nice in the processing but here was my first attempt. May go back and reprocess now you have highlighted it again. It is worth persevering though - if I could get this out of the data a year ago (when I really had little idea what i was doing!) then i suspect there is something nice hiding in there Paddy Great result, Paddy. The framing captures that tail of dust superbly. Maybe just ease off the colour saturation a tad? I made the mistake of looking at Rob Gendler's last night. Wowser... Olly Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tom OD Posted December 29, 2016 Share Posted December 29, 2016 12 hours ago, ollypenrice said: Anyone tried this? In favour: it's very beautiful. Against: it's very low from European locations, even here at Lat 44. It's very faint. As in very. It also lies on the geostationary satellite equivalent of the M25. Call it five trails per sub if you're lucky. Fifteen if you're not.* It is attractive in both colour and structure so there are no short cuts. You need a lot of luminance and a lot (oh yesss...) of colour. I am hoping to finish it one day but, at sixty three, I feel I should have started this as a young man... * Why are these satellites predominantly green? lly PS As usual, this is O'Donoghue's fault! I m happy to take any blame associated with too much data Rob Gendlers image is just so good. He did use the Australia service and not New Mexico though, so the higher latitude so to speak would give a much better signal. And its over 20 hours per panel. So I think we re in the right ball park with what we re doing. My old Tak data has tonnes of airplane trails in it. If I remember correctly, this and the Witchead are the worst placed objects in the sky for trails. Tom Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PatrickGilliland Posted December 29, 2016 Share Posted December 29, 2016 4 hours ago, ollypenrice said: Maybe just ease off the colour saturation a tad Agreed and a tad less NR would be more suited I think. As I mentioned to @Tom OD was what I know refer to as my 'Hollywood', a phase i went through (sorry about that!) it catches the eye on first glance but lacks the subtlety, finesse and quality to have any long lasting impact. A revisit is due ASAP me thinks..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ollypenrice Posted December 29, 2016 Author Share Posted December 29, 2016 2 hours ago, PatrickGilliland said: Agreed and a tad less NR would be more suited I think. As I mentioned to @Tom OD was what I know refer to as too 'Hollywood', a phase i went through (sorry about that!) it catches the eye on first glance but lacks the subtlety, finesse and quality to have any long lasting impact. A revisit is due ASAP me thinks..... I'm more an Ollywood man myself... Groan I'm just posting a version on the DS board now. Olly EDIT: Oh, this IS the DS board! I meant it to go in Imaging Discussion. I'll put the pic in a proper thread. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wimvb Posted December 29, 2016 Share Posted December 29, 2016 Ok, I missed this prequel. Went straight for the picture post. Didn't realise that background had been discussed already. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.