Jump to content

Banner.jpg.b89429c566825f6ab32bcafbada449c9.jpg

M81 and M82 HD - The inevitable conclusion


Recommended Posts

Well no surprise this was coming next after the M81 and M82 recently published :) (total 103 hours data from RCOS, AP RH and OS RH - the latter used as the base frame onto which the objects were placed) - think this concludes my look at this area.

 

58efa343c95e1_M81andM82Finalv17.thumb.png.2c596cdd0e02da5ee7b37c9b00aee30b.png

C&C welcomed, if not hope you like.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 29
  • Created
  • Last Reply
2 minutes ago, MARS1960 said:

That is absolutely fantastic Paddy, the best i have ever seen.

BUT, i'm going to be very brave and say it, i wish the ratio of sky to galaxy was larger if you get what i mean.

 

No idea what you mean :) 

58efaf026ab7e_M81andM82Finalv17large.thumb.png.bfaa4266b418cca51a148a67bcfd5410.png

I only cropped a little as some of the outer stars are not so good.  As big as i can go for now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Very nice indeed.

I can't comment on technicalities, such as they may be, but aesthetically that image is truly amazing.

Something of a beauty pageant too. Who is best looking? M81 is a fine galaxy with classic beauty, but M82 just pips it for me. Those jets! 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, tomato said:

A superb combination, another image to put on my observatory wall (when I get one) to inspire my imaging efforts.

Steve

 

 
 

So another image to put on the wall you don't have - not sure how to take that ;) - seriously though thanks for comments - always chuffed when i can inspire.

2 hours ago, wimvb said:

Stunning! Better than Nasa's APOD, imo.

I can't recall ever having seen Holmberg so bright in an image of this area.

 
 

APOD is what it is pretty sure some of my other images are better than what they publish, take that place with a large pinch of salt.  Support of all the people kind enough to feedback is worth more by a mile.  Appreciate comments.

57 minutes ago, Paul M said:

Very nice indeed.

I can't comment on technicalities, such as they may be, but aesthetically that image is truly amazing.

Something of a beauty pageant too. Who is best looking? M81 is a fine galaxy with classic beauty, but M82 just pips it for me. Those jets! 

 
 

Why pick when they are both there so well placed :) - appreciate the comment

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I was extremely impressed with the individual frames, but the combination raises things another level or three.  A masterpiece.

Have you descriped the Paddy-multi-layering-HDR technique anywhere (or is it patent pending)?

Congratulations.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

56 minutes ago, gnomus said:

I was extremely impressed with the individual frames, but the combination raises things another level or three.  A masterpiece.

Have you descriped the Paddy-multi-layering-HDR technique anywhere (or is it patent pending)?

Congratulations.

 

Ha, well I would now like to type something really neat and technical that makes it sound good, oh well!  The truth is that I have found with the longer FL HDRComp/HDRMT only works to a point and critically it does not return the colour even when lum variance is found.  In fact it does not find all the detail even in the lum channels.

Having noted different details showing in in RGB as well that I could not find in the Lum channels i decided to have a play and realised full manual control was the only way forward.  So as per example below, I simply process the linear and stretch it x times (5-15 depending on what is revealed on each stretch, from very dark to beyond the final stretch), the trick is then manually layering all of the detail back into the target frame (L7 third frame on top row).  So I add in darker clearer detail that HDR tools are not realising and the brighter details above my target frame.

2017-04-14_10-08-51.thumb.png.c3828175ddfac74abe2220aa06a3f0fc.png 

The time-consuming part is as you add each layer to your target frame you then if required, complete any additional processing before adding the next.  So using the RGB as an example below is RGBv1 (Target + 1 frame added then processed ready for next layer) , V9 was the final version i used before i added the process lum.  As you can see though this is almost nice enough as a stand alone image.  Of course, you still have to get those intermediate processing steps correct so as to compliment the next layering round.

2017-04-14_10-09-25.thumb.png.07569eaf4a7a4a42e7c81238a3b33caa.png

So, no rocket science, a lot of manual adjustments and tweaks.  I think this approach will only work effectively if you have clear objectives on what you are aiming for.  Each tweak is for a reason, no reason == no tweak!  Really understanding the data is the key to success, working to an objective is the key.

Very time consuming but I figure if each photon has taken x million light years to get here giving it a day of my life to process is not a bad trade off!

Hope that helps some.

Thanks for the feedback too, glad it is being so well received.

1 hour ago, wxsatuser said:

All the hours of processing certainly paid off. :icon_salut:

Thanks Mike, appreciate the comments.

44 minutes ago, Allinthehead said:

Wow that's pretty special Paddy. 

Thanks, as best I can get it for now.  I have plans to add more data later in year to really get all the IFN (another 50x1200 lum subs might do the trick :) )

Thanks all.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Petergoodhew said:

Paddy - we need to get you to run processing courses!  Fascinating insight into how you pull off such amazing images.  This one is stunningly good.

Well, I will be at 1 UK show this year and at NEAIC in NYC next year, also looking at the option of running some weekend courses later this year.  For those who can get to Evesham if there is enough interest I could run a course there for 8 people for a weekend or even a 1 day blitz!  Thanks for comment.

1 hour ago, wimvb said:

Who ever said PixInsight couldn't do layers? :headbang:

Great work, Paddy

 

I can do lots of things and did, something are just beyond it (skip the whole science Vs accuracy bit :) )- thanks for comment

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Paddy,

that image is a real statement, a bit like Bob Beamon's 8.90 m long jump in Mexico City 1968. You may be beaten one day but it will probably take 20+ years.

Congratulations!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, gorann said:

Paddy,

that image is a real statement, a bit like Bob Beamon's 8.90 m long jump in Mexico City 1968. You may be beaten one day but it will probably take 20+ years.

Congratulations!

 

Thanks, Goran - I know what you mean.  But I have a simple philosophy.  Make the next image a little better than the last - improve the process and learn something a little better.  I set myself an objective at start of each process session.  May only be 5 minutes of extra experimenting sometimes and hours reading.  Then I apply and amend the process.

Of course, not all data is 100 hours from multiple scopes! The next image may not be such a statement in terms of the composition - but it should always improve technically over the last.  That has always been my approach and going well.  

But as I said - some images just catch the attention better than others, great thing is if the next is a single pane on an FSQ those in the know still appreciate the processing.  Else this would be a very short lived hobby :)

Appreciate the sentiment and kind words

4 hours ago, Mr Spock said:

A breathtaking image - I'm lost for words!

Thanks Michael, the one was adequate ;) 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 13/04/2017 at 13:14, PatrickGilliland said:

RCOS, AP RH and OS RH

Hi Paddy,

What great images.  Can you tell me what the initials stand for?  I googled them and got Richey Chretien Optical system for the first one, but nothing for the others.  Are these your scopes?

Really nice job.

Regards

Steve.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • 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.