A year of improvement (I hope)

[Datalord]

I dusted off some old data I had from last May and wanted to see if I had improved my postprocessing skills. I can't remember how long exposure time I had on it, but it was shot with my WO71 and unmodded Canon 6D.

I'll do it blind, so tell me which you like better and why. Then I can say something about the difference in the process.

1:

2:

[Demonperformer]

Well, the nebulosity in #1 is clearly more pronounced, but I prefer #2. I like the more understated look and there is a small fleck of nebulosity in NAN near the top of the main block that stands out quite vividly in #2 as a deeper red. In #1 it seems to get lost, merging in with the background. And the sky background in #1 looks rather "muddy" to me, with a somewhat greenish tinge along the top of NAN.

[Datalord]

On 3/11/2018 at 15:46, Demonperformer said:

Well, the nebulosity in #1 is clearly more pronounced, but I prefer #2. I like the more understated look and there is a small fleck of nebulosity in NAN near the top of the main block that stands out quite vividly in #2 as a deeper red. In #1 it seems to get lost, merging in with the background. And the sky background in #1 looks rather "muddy" to me, with a somewhat greenish tinge along the top of NAN.

Thanks for the comment. You were right about the green, just goes to show that I should sleep on a picture a few times to see it fresh eyed. I updated it.

So, 1 is the new process using PS. I don't know what the origin is, but I learned it from the tutorial someone here sent: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5GgruZ-1zQ0

 

2 was processed with StarTools, which lacks the controls I have with PS. I'm sure it can do wonders in the right hands, but those are not mine