Orion Neb Re make

[OXO]

Cropped this one out of the full frame and Re editted it..

James

[OXO]

Thanks Caz,

The hard part is not too over expose the core/Trapeziem but i had done so which my camera to get more Neb showing, if i had the time i would of taken some images showing the Trapeziem and overlayed them in the core..

James :stars:

[OXO]

Yeah Caz it's the only way round it for me at least ehehe

[radioactive]

real vivid colours James mighty fine piece of processing you have there

[OXO]

Thanks Radio, the clours are vivid arnt they

[Ambermile]

well, nice pic. Really. Personally I am not a fan of overlaying different exposures over each other to see everything 'cos it smacks of cheating to me. I like this one because it's true. It's exactly what you get when you try to take a pic and that matters I think. So there :cheers:

arthur

[OXO]

Thanks Arthur,

Yeah it is Cheating at the end of the day your right but some people prefer to do it that way, iam in two minds myself if i should do that or not.

James

[MartinB]

Oooh, lets have a heated debate :laugh: I don't think it's cheating really. Giving different exposures to different areas is something that has been done in film photography since it was 1st invented. It is just a way of getting round the technical limitations of the medium.

Anyway James, whatever, you're as pure as driven snow :laugh: and the image is a belter.

Martin

[OXO]

Thanks Martin,

Hehe i knew this would happen Cheating wise i suppose it's how you measure it i mean we all stack images then process them without doing so we end up with Carp images due to noise etc etc. On the other hand we took the images and we can do as we please with them hehe...

Think i'll vote Lib Debs and sit on the fence :shock:

[Kaptain Klevtsov]

I wonder if it is cheating. The human eye can distinguish a much larger dynamic range than a DSLR or any other (affordable) imaging system. The dynamic range is the difference between the brightest bits and the darkest bits. This is just a mechanical way of using the kit to get the image that we see through the eyepiece. I was a little taken aback after seeing Jupiter and moons through the telescope that I couldn't get both in the same shot with the Nikon without either the planet being hugely overexposed or no moons visible.

The camera mechanically splits the RGB image using filters on the chip as the chip cannot do colour unaided. These colours are automagically reassembled by the camera before it spits out the image. So if we agree that that is not cheating, why is multiple bracketed exposure cheating? Is stacking the webcam images therefore cheating, 'cos that's what Registax does? Is the cheat bit where we have to "do" something?

I see the technique as similar to doing seperate RGB and luminance images with a monochrome CCD/CMOS chip camera, then stacking the channels.

At the end of the day, when all is said and done, it's an image of two halves.

Captain Chaos

[Naz]

Got it in one CC, even colour film has three layers (4 in some) each record a single colour, then recombining them for printing, (even here the three colours are split again, before being merged in the final image)

Printing has always used manipulation, exposing parts of the image to bring out detail, holding parts back so as not to burn out detail.

Artists decide when painting / sketching, what to include or leave out, what perspective / relationship each part has with the other.

So I don't see what the difference is.

nabban

Record the image, publish and be damned!

[OXO]

All True CAPTAIN/NABBAN, thinking out loud who cares so long as it looks nice :shock:

James

[Naz]

Exactly James.

nabban