Jump to content

Banner.jpg.39bf5bb2e6bf87794d3e2a4b88f26f1b.jpg

IC447


PatrickGilliland
 Share

Recommended Posts

Saw Olly's version of this and thought it would be nice to have a go, just been waiting for the data to build up.  I do have HA as well as the LRGB here, to be honest I liked this and if it is not broken......

Just short of 17 hours data.  Hopefully will be received better than last image which bombed :) Tried not to push too hard on this and let the data lead the processing so C&C welcome.

rgb 2.png

Thanks, Paddy

 

  • Like 20
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Paddy,

that is a magnificent image!

I do have one comment which is not really a critique but more a curious question. After looking at it for a while I suddenly realized that there were no blue stars in the image, and some that I assume could be blue appear to have a grayish shine around them. To find out if this is a region without blue stars I had a look at Olly's version and it was full of blue stars. Interestingly, Olly also had much more yellow stars than in your version. Did you deliberately suppress star colour (you indicate that you have been gentle in the processing) and do you think that we are often going over the top on star colour? Here are crops of the same area from your image and Olly's image to illustrate this.

Again, I am curious and not critical and I love both versions.

Cheers

Paddy IC447crop.jpg

Olly IC447crop.jpg

Edited by gorann
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Stu1976j said:

Outstanding image I could sit and stare at it for ages, but work is calling. so much detail and colour in there. Thanks for sharing it with us :) 

Thanks Stu

3 hours ago, jetstream said:

Another top notch image! Great work Paddy :thumbsup:

Thanks Gerry

2 hours ago, swag72 said:

I like the colours in this and it's nicely processed. Is that some sort of blooming artifact on that bright yellow star to the left?

 

27 minutes ago, wimvb said:

I like it, enough said.

But as Sara, I also wonder what is causing the streak on the bright star. It looks like a diffraction spike, but that should be on more bright stars.

 

Thanks Sara and Wim, that is what I am calling a random periodic reflection.  It happens from time to time and never really worked out the cause!  Normally i process out but in this case I exercised artistic license and left in, the area was just a 'large red area' so decided I quite liked it there for this one.  

2 hours ago, gorann said:

Paddy,

that is a magnificent image!

I do have one comment which is not really a critique but more a curious question. After looking at it for a while I suddenly realized that there were no blue stars in the image, and some that I assume could be blue appear to have a grayish shine around them. To find out if this is a region without blue stars I had a look at Olly's version and it was full of blue stars. Interestingly, Olly also had much more yellow stars than in your version. Did you deliberately suppress star colour (you indicate that you have been gentle in the processing) and do you think that we are often going over the top on star colour? Here are crops of the same area from your image and Olly's image to illustrate this.

Again, I am curious and not critical and I love both versions.

Cheers

 

2

 Hi Goran

While I will use images such as Olly's for references occasionally it is important (for me anyway) that i simply don't copy them.  I process what the data (subject to my techniques) tells me is there. In the case in question many of the stars in the reference image are actually closer to white and the corona type area is coloured.  Where this occurs i prefer not to push the corona area (I know it is not the actual corona). Where my stars themselves have colour then i let this continue in the area.  Just a different approach.  I may yet change one day but is the way i prefer to process at the moment.

Thanks for comments

Paddy

1 hour ago, Dave In Vermont said:

Beautiful take! Thank you for the labor!

I see some blue and red and orange in the stars. Maybe the colours weren't suppressed? I see too many images where the blue-violet is utterly overwhelming though. Perhaps some cut-off to prevent this?

Thank's again -

Dave

 

 

Thanks Dave - I processed the data in what i would say was relative weighting/colouring for the overall presentation.  I do use a little colour control on star halo's to remove and rapid colour changes and this, for me anyway, provides a nice overall balance to the image.

Paddy

1 hour ago, MattJenko said:

That has some seriously lovely and well controlled detail in there. Well done as always Paddy. 

Thanks for the comments Matt - useful comments aside it is still are difficult target and happy with the results.

Paddy 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, PatrickGilliland said:

Thanks Sara and Wim, that is what I am calling a random periodic reflection.  It happens from time to time and never really worked out the cause!  Normally i process out but in this case I exercised artistic license and left in, the area was just a 'large red area' so decided I quite liked it there for this one.   

While I can't question artistic licence at all, and we absolutely leave in what we like, I found it quite a distraction and I couldn't help looking at it as an 'issue' in an otherwise great image..... That's just my personal opinion of course Paddy and I appreciate that you it left in because you liked it :) 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, swag72 said:

While I can't question artistic licence at all, and we absolutely leave in what we like, I found it quite a distraction and I couldn't help looking at it as an 'issue' in an otherwise great image..... That's just my personal opinion of course Paddy and I appreciate that you it left in because you liked it :) 

And because it's a real fiddle to get out when inside a star field! - I might yet look at it later today if people do find annoying though - it is genuinely and artefact so might be best!  Thanks Sara 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes.  I like the splash of red.  I also would be interested in the star artefact - I've been having a similar problem recently.  But like yourself, I also find that it doesn't detract from the image.  17 hours very well spent.

chris

Edited by cfpendock
Link to comment
Share on other sites

50 minutes ago, swag72 said:

While I can't question artistic licence at all, and we absolutely leave in what we like, I found it quite a distraction and I couldn't help looking at it as an 'issue' in an otherwise great image..... That's just my personal opinion of course Paddy and I appreciate that you it left in because you liked it :) 

Here is a version with spike reduced down as much as I can do without comprimising - agree i prefer it now :)  Took the change to deal with a few little bits that i also spotted!

rgb final.png

 

  • Like 6
Link to comment
Share on other sites

30 minutes ago, astro mick said:

One comment Paddy.

"Wish it were mine"

Mick.

 

Thanks Mick

8 minutes ago, cfpendock said:

Yes.  I like the splash of red.  I also would be interested in the star artefact - I've been having a similar problem recently.  17 hours very well spent.

chris

 

Suspect it is a reflection of the filter housing, but it happens so infrequently and no real pattern.  Can process out so not something to stress over :) Thanks for comment Chris, Paddy

Link to comment
Share on other sites

37 minutes ago, Barry-Wilson said:

I really like this image Paddy, lots to hold your interest, and a delicate feel.  Definitely one for my to-do list.

Thanks Barry - pleased with this one.

Be interested to see how you get on - I am getting increasingly frustrated with 'wasting my time' under UK skies at the moment.  Even when it is clear the seeing is poor.  Of course, I will press on anyway but that deflated feeling can only be stomached so many times after a clear night.  Waking to find a lot of mediocre data gets a tad repetitive.

27 minutes ago, simmo39 said:

V nice  paddy. :headbang:

Thanks Simmo

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Great, Paddy. It's nice to see your wider field with some Ha regions providing a contrast to the blue.

Gorann's comparison was interesting. What struck me, really, was more the similarity between our results than the differences and I find this reassuring (meaning we're not making it up!) Which scope did you use on this? Mine was done with the TEC 140. When I compare my TEC results with my Tak I get more stars from the TEC, they are smaller and I probably do get more blue ones. There is some debate about the TEC's blue correction. I have nothing to complain about, usually, but it does sometimes struggle slightly with blue stars, perhaps ones very strong in the UV, as some are. (It seems that the choice of chip may have a major bearing on the TEC's correction.) So maybe the TEC is good at finding stellar blues or maybe it bloats them and I pull in that colour from the edge to the core in processing. I'll see what I can find out from a selection of spectral classes on our images.

Back soon!

Olly

Link to comment
Share on other sites

53 minutes ago, ollypenrice said:

Great, Paddy. It's nice to see your wider field with some Ha regions providing a contrast to the blue.

Gorann's comparison was interesting. What struck me, really, was more the similarity between our results than the differences and I find this reassuring (meaning we're not making it up!) Which scope did you use on this? Mine was done with the TEC 140. When I compare my TEC results with my Tak I get more stars from the TEC, they are smaller and I probably do get more blue ones. There is some debate about the TEC's blue correction. I have nothing to complain about, usually, but it does sometimes struggle slightly with blue stars, perhaps ones very strong in the UV, as some are. (It seems that the choice of chip may have a major bearing on the TEC's correction.) So maybe the TEC is good at finding stellar blues or maybe it bloats them and I pull in that colour from the edge to the core in processing. I'll see what I can find out from a selection of spectral classes on our images.

Back soon!

Olly

 

Hi Olly

This was on the FSQ 106 - there is blue there of course, I just avoided amplifying.  It was not as strong as yours relative to the other star colours hence my version has a touch of blueish white rather than strong blue.  

This opens up a whole other debate of course, I avoid increasing star colour sometimes as when viewed at a smaller size it makes the stars look over-coloured, when viewed at full size the stronger colours work better though.  So rather than focussing on the correct spectrum it was targeted more at a balanced image overall.

As for what is real - I am really trying to let the data tell me how to process it and not force things.  So fairly confident this is a good representation of the object (spectra complaint or not)

Let me know what you find.

Paddy

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue. By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.