LRGB Data Set

[gorann]

Here is a somewhat more saturated version - I realize v.1 was a bit dull. I post it on Astrobin and I assume you do not mind Rodd.

[gorann]

2 minutes ago, wimvb said:

Thanks Wim! I will give it a try, but it apparently means that I will have to do my first PI star mask?

[wimvb]

48 minutes ago, gorann said:

I only attended to use decon very selectively on brighter parts but got too many ringed stars with PI (I am sure different setteings would have worked), so I ended up using an old trusted PS filter that is also a deconvolution but with much fewer settings (actually just one), and I used it at the lowest setting

PixInsight:

PS:

[wimvb]

8 minutes ago, gorann said:

I realize v.1 was a bit dull

Keep at it. Soon you'll have it as saturated as my version. 

[gorann]

Rodd, I just realized, when I did the calculations while posting on Astrobin, that this was 49 hours of data! No wonder it was so clean (except for the gradient) so thanks again for charing!!!

[wimvb]

22 minutes ago, gorann said:

Thanks Wim! I will give it a try, but it apparently means that I will have to do my first PI star mask?

Creating the PSF of the stars is a bit trickier. Just make sure you use only stars which have a Moffat profile (not Gaussian), and an intensity (A) between about 0.1 and 0.9 About 20 stars is enought to create the psf

[gorann]

16 minutes ago, wimvb said:

Keep at it. Soon you'll have it as saturated as my version. 

Yes, I expect we will finally converge into something "lagom". By the way, it is not the number of buttons you have, it is how you swing them....

[wimvb]

And "it don't mean a thing, if it hain't got that swing ...."

[Rodd]

46 minutes ago, wimvb said:

How do you "up the dark ringing parameter". Sorry to be such a novice on PI.....

And use the Dynamic PSF tool to create a PSF image that you use under External PSF in the top box.  There is a good Deconvolution tutorial under light vortex tutorial.  Just google Pixinsight Deconvolution Tutorial and there should be one from Light Vortex--check it out.

Rodd

[Rodd]

50 minutes ago, gorann said:

Here is a somewhat more saturated version - I realize v.1 was a bit dull. I post it on Astrobin and I assume you do not mind Rodd.

Not at all.  But see if you can reduce the brightness in the core of M8 (the white zone). If you notch down the brightness the saturation will increase.  The detail looks great at full resolution

Rodd

[gorann]

3 minutes ago, Rodd said:

Not at all.  But see if you can reduce the brightness in the core of M8 (the white zone). If you notch down the brightness the saturation will increase.  The detail looks great at full resolution

Rodd

Probably a good idea but I am off to bed so I have a look at it tomorrow

[wimvb]

How about this?

[Rodd]

1 hour ago, wimvb said:

ow about this?

Thats the one--2 tone M8--very nice.  Golden star field

Rodd

[gorann]

Yes, the golden starfield is nice. It inspired me to make mine a bit more golden by tweaking the curves. A balancing act as green tried to pop up.

Edit: After posting here I see something looking like reddish gradients at the top and bottom - or maybe not? Could crop it of fix it.

[gorann]

Fixed the top and bottom edge (curves + layermask)

[wimvb]

I think we're converging, and setting a swedish standard. There is a lot of faint Ha in this region, so it's difficult to judge where one nebula ends and another begins.

[Rodd]

3 hours ago, gorann said:

fter posting here I see something looking like reddish gradients at the top and bottom - or maybe not? Could crop it of fix it.

There is allot of red (H) nebulosity in the region.  Could be the red filter picking up the red frequencies in teh interstellar gas.

Rodd

[Rodd]

23 hours ago, gorann said:

Yes, I expect we will finally converge into something "lagom". By the way, it is not the number of buttons you have, it is how you swing them....

Which do your prefer--1 or 2--I redid things.  

 

23 hours ago, wimvb said:

How about this?

1 or 2?  I think 1 looks more natural, though 2 is more like what is commonly posted.

[Rodd]

Here are your tornadoes Wim....took some work with a 4" scope, but I think I see a couple of dark wisps.

 

[wimvb]

Excellent. Thanks Rodd.

[gorann]

9 hours ago, Rodd said:

Which do your prefer--1 or 2--I redid things.  

 

I think I go for nr 1. Looks more "natural" as Wim says, but both are very nice.

[Ola Skarpen]

 

Then I have made a version of this as well. Great data and work with. and thank you for sharing this with us

Made a soft versjon without any sharpness

 

[gorann]

Very nice Ola! But I think you cropped it a bit to much particularly to the left and bottom. Did you just not want to deal with the gradients? Gradient Exterminator in PS had no problem fixing it and Wim @wimvbgot rid of them using some magic procedure in PI

[Rodd]

47 minutes ago, Ola Skarpen said:

Then I have made a version of this as well. Great data and work with. and thank you for sharing this with us

But that is wonderful despite the crop.  Notice how the stars are subdued--secondary--not glaring like my second one.  They definitely look more natural.

Rodd

[Ola Skarpen]

Yes, there was a little gradient there, I did not see this before the picture was finished, so I cut it off. I should have removed this before stretching, but forgot it. I can take a new round on this tonight.