Jump to content

Banner.jpg.b89429c566825f6ab32bcafbada449c9.jpg

Rosette complete

Rodd

By Rodd
in Imaging - Deep Sky

Recommended Posts

tomato

tomato

Posted
Posted

Wow! Clearly this is AP Masterclass territory, when being asked to choose between two images, both of which I would consider to be at the pinnacle of what can be achieved.

Having said that, and seeing them together, my vote would also go with the slightly softer first one. Outstanding.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • Replies 36
  • Created
  • Last Reply
Rodd

Rodd

Posted
  • Author
Posted
21 minutes ago, tomato said:

Wow! Clearly this is AP Masterclass territory, when being asked to choose between two images, both of which I would consider to be at the pinnacle of what can be achieved.

Having said that, and seeing them together, my vote would also go with the slightly softer first one. Outstanding.

Thank's T!

Rodd

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Rodd

Rodd

Posted
  • Author
Posted
6 minutes ago, Laurin Dave said:

Like others I favour the first one Rodd.... better all round but particularly the stars

 

Dave

Thanks, Dave....yes, I find quite often that when I feel compelled to improve an image, the stars are usually in the category of "needs to improve"

Rodd 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
gorann

gorann

Posted
Posted

Yes, the stars are as perfect as stars can be in the new version. What ever you did differently in the processing it effectively got rid of (or never produced) the dark rings that affected the stars in the first version. PI is mostly unchartered territory for me but I trust that you know what you did and how to repeat it for your next target.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Rodd

Rodd

Posted
  • Author
Posted
3 hours ago, gorann said:

Yes, the stars are as perfect as stars can be in the new version. What ever you did differently in the processing it effectively got rid of (or never produced) the dark rings that affected the stars in the first version. PI is mostly unchartered territory for me but I trust that you know what you did and how to repeat it for your next target.

Believe it or not, it mostly boils down to not overdoing the same things--I did perform deconvolution in the linear state in version 1, which allowed for a little finer detail (but if one pushes too hard this can backfire).  Its kind of like DNA.....the difference between a chimpanzee and humans is something like .5% but look at the difference.  The difference between image 1 and image 2 is like that--subtle changes in tool settings and order of operations.  The adage "The devil is in the details" could just have easily been penned "The angle is in the details).

Rodd

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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

Go to topic listing

  • 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.