Jump to content

sgl_imaging_challenge_banner_31.thumb.jpg.b7a41d6a0fa4e315f57ea3e240acf140.jpg

Recommended Posts

I thought I would try the new ArcsinhStretch process in PixInsight on some recent data of M33 taken with an ED80DS+Atik414ex osc. Prior to applying the process I used DynamicCrop, DBE, BackgroundNeutralization, ColourCalibration, and TGVDenoise (the latter I am very much a novice). One application of ArcsinhStretch produced this result:

59e3a1b8af791_M33-osc_DBEbnccscnrtgvdenoisearcsinh.thumb.jpg.c3cc0a8aa847a088df305923a13f42dc.jpg

I also took Luminace and Ha in the same imaging session but the above is just from the osc.

I have tried to emulate the result in Photoshop using the procedure in a recent post by @sharkmelley but so far I've failed to get any where near this so I must be doing something wrong. I've added my tif file of the pre-stretched image in case anyone wants to have a go.

This is an image of the PI workspace showing the settings I used.

arcsinh-workspace.thumb.jpg.5aac1fb2dc10efb0c1dec1d44ecc1c35.jpg

As ever any help, suggestions, comments would be much appreciated.

Thank you for looking.

Adrian

 

M33-osc_ABE+bn+cc+scnr+tgvdenoise.tif

Edited by Adreneline
Typo corrected.
Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for the TIF file - that was very useful. Galaxies often benefit from an iterative application of PixInsight ArcsinhStretch.  For instance, if you perform two successive stretches of 7 giving a total stretch of 7x7=49 the galaxy will actually appear brighter than if you do a single stretch of 49.  Or even do 3 successive stretches that multiply up to 49.

This image seems to be a tough one to do using my colour preserving stretch in Photoshop.  I'll play around with it a bit further.

Mark

Edited by sharkmelley
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I played around with it a bit further using the colour preserving stretch in Photoshop - the problem was the background still being too bright.  It actually works very well but only after you have first subtracted a bit more background using "Levels".    A setting of 4 for the black seemed to work well.

Mark

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

For instance, if you perform two successive stretches of 7 giving a total stretch of 7x7=49 the galaxy will actually appear brighter than if you do a single stretch of 49.  Or even do 3 successive stretches that multiply up to 49.

Thank you for the advice Mark; I'll give it at a go with repeated applications and see how it compares.

I will be interested to see what you make of my tif file in PS. It's not the best of data (23 x 300s) but seeing in the East Midlands is rarely favourable.

Thank you.

Adrian

Link to post
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
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • Similar Content

    • By DaveS
      Finally I have something like First Light with the ODK12. This is just 6 x 600 sec subs Luminance with the Moravian G3 16200 and Chroma filters. Sigma Add stacking in AstroArt 7 followed by a slight crop to get rid of dither edges, Gradient Reduction (As the moon was starting to interfere), DDP and Unsharp Mask.
      Calibration was with Darks and Flats only as I had neglected to do Dark Flats *slapped wrist*.

      Reduced 50% for upload and JPEG. Yes it's a bit noisy, and I think I may have focus issues.
      C&C welcome as usual. 
    • By PH-R
      M33 captured over 4 nights, 16hrs of data using 300sec subs, darks from library, mixed flats for an average and bias frames. Camera: Canon 600D. Everything put into Deep Sky Stacker and the resulting image processed in PS.
      I used a video made by Scott Rosen on processing to help me process and I learnt some really powerful techniques to use in PS.  I think this is my best processed image to date, so I feel happy I have made some progress. Looking forward to reprocessing my old data armed with the new knowledge 🙂. 

    • By alexbb
      At the same astro party where I shot the Pleiades and partially Iris + the surroundings, I started gathering data for M33.
      For this image I used only a SkyWatcher 150PDS through which I recorded the photons on an ASI1600MMC.
      Curiously enough, I shot ~3.5h of luminance there under Bortle 2 skies, but a simple STF in PixInisght revealed less details than in 4h of luminance (through a LP filter) shot from home under Bortle 6-7 skies.
      Nevertheless, I put all the luminance together, I shot another 40mins of each RGB + 1h45min of Ha and made an image. A bit of colour only I also borrowed from an image I made 2 years ago, but in a small ratio.
      For full resolution: https://www.astrobin.com/yqr8xe/

    • By alan4908
      I've often wondered how my post processing skills have changed over the years, so I decided to find out by extracting some data which I acquired c2.5 years ago and performing a reprocess on M33.  The LRGB image with an Ha blend into the red channel represents just over 15 hours and was taken with my ED80 on my NEQ6. 
      The main post processing differences are:
      - I corrected for a slight camera tilt via PS, this results in slightly oddly shaped stars towards the edges of the frame. You should be able to see theses defects in the old image if you zoom in.
      - PI's Photometric Colour Calibration was used on the new image. 
      - PI's HDMRT was used on the Lum to increase the contrast (before I used the PS High Pass Filter)
      - PI's Dark Script Enhance was used to enhance the galaxies dust lanes.
      So, still a mixture of PS and PI but now with more PI.
      Alan
      (My original result from 2.5 years ago is in the album Deep Sky II). 
×
×
  • 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.