WO Star 71 Horsehead Ha 11hr

[Allinthehead]

Good evening all. I spent alot of time over the last week gathering data and learning new processing techniques. Part of that involved learning how to use pixinsight to stack, and some basic processing. I have to admit i found it to be quite a struggle, and counter intuitive. Having said that i think the pre processed stack turned out better than i could ever get with dss.

So this was stacked in pixinsight. Light stretching using an inverted mask and histogram transformation. Saved as tiff and switched to PS. I then did a screen mask invert. Some selective noise reduction to darker areas. Local contrast enhancement and Make stars smaller (noel carboni). Light curves and selective sharpening of brighter areas. I then put the image i saved after using pixinsight as a layer underneath and used the eraser on the bright stars to tone them down a little.

Image is 11hrs in 60 second subs captured using sgpro. Equipment details as per sig.

Hope you enjoy and any tips on how to improve most welcome.

Richard.

 

 

 

[gnomus]

There ain't much wrong with that.....

[RichLD]

Very nice indeed! 

[Allinthehead]

1 minute ago, gnomus said:

There ain't much wrong with that.....

Thanks Steve. Thanks for the help too. I used your link for the star mask.

[Jonk]

The Star 71 delivers again. Well done.

[Allinthehead]

11 minutes ago, RichLD said:

Very nice indeed! 

Thanks Rich.

Just now, Jonk said:

The Star 71 delivers again. Well done.

Thanks Jonk. Great little scope.

[Alien 13]

It might just be me but the FL of the Star 71 lets most images sit nicely in context with the surroundings.

Alan

[red dwalf]

wow

 

[Allinthehead]

25 minutes ago, Alien 13 said:

It might just be me but the FL of the Star 71 lets most images sit nicely in context with the surroundings.

Alan

Not just you. That's why i got it. I found the Sw 80ed seemed to cut parts of the objects i was going for.

22 minutes ago, red dwalf said:

wow

 

Thanks red dwalf. The wow put a smile on my face.

[Allinthehead]

I think this might be a classic example of posting the image too soon. I noticed the histogram could do with a slight black point adjustment. Is this better? I need to get a calibrated monitor.

[Davey-T]

Well done Richard, guess you're pleased with that, even more pleased getting 11 hours of clear sky in Ireland 

Dave

[swag72]

Phew ...... I looked at this image last night and noticed everyone was saying it was good........... I wanted to buck the trend and say that it looked a little flat and needed a contrast boost... but it'd  be hard not to look churlish when everyone says nice things.....

So the edit is bang on for me!!! Nicely done and a very nice image  

[Davey-T]

1 hour ago, swag72 said:

Phew ...... I looked at this image last night and noticed everyone was saying it was good........... I wanted to buck the trend and say that it looked a little flat and needed a contrast boost... but it'd  be hard not to look churlish when everyone says nice things.....

So the edit is bang on for me!!! Nicely done and a very nice image  

As a first go with new kit it's a great image, plenty of room for improvement, I also wonder about lot's of short exposures with CMOS cameras achieving the same sharpness and contrast as long CCD exposures, have to ask Gina.

Extra bonus points awarded for achieving this in Ireland 

Dave

[Allinthehead]

11 hours ago, Davey-T said:

Well done Richard, guess you're pleased with that, even more pleased getting 11 hours of clear sky in Ireland 

Dave

Thanks Dave. It's funny I always laugh when you guys complain about your cloudy skies. Try living here I think but it's all relative. There are worse places.

 

4 hours ago, swag72 said:

Phew ...... I looked at this image last night and noticed everyone was saying it was good........... I wanted to buck the trend and say that it looked a little flat and needed a contrast boost... but it'd  be hard not to look churlish when everyone says nice things.....

So the edit is bang on for me!!! Nicely done and a very nice image  

Thanks Sara. I think I just forgot to adjust the histogram after blending the first layer in. I prefer an honest opinion with some constructive criticism but I know what you mean about looking churlish.

[ollypenrice]

You have a really serious amount of data there and you may underestimate how hard you can push the processing when this is the case. The version 2 is much better but I suspect that the local contrasts could be pushed harder still. Of course, that might not give the 'look' you want but I bet it's an option given your depth of data. Very good image. 

Olly

 

[Allinthehead]

31 minutes ago, ollypenrice said:

You have a really serious amount of data there and you may underestimate how hard you can push the processing when this is the case. The version 2 is much better but I suspect that the local contrasts could be pushed harder still. Of course, that might not give the 'look' you want but I bet it's an option given your depth of data. Very good image. 

Olly

 

Thanks Olly. I'm sure you're right. I hardly pushed this at all, i was concentrating on protecting the stars. When i pushed it they suffered. I've no doubt that someone with more experience could push it further. Any takers?