The Birds revisited.

[ollypenrice]

Eagle and Swan: I was never really happy with the processing of this data and couldn't put my finger on what was wrong so I had another go. It also got me thinkiing about the summer skies which was no bad thing in the dead of winter! I hope the stars are now better and the emission nebulosity deeper.

HaOIIILRGB. Atik 11000 mono/Tak FSQ106N. High res data for the Eagle added from ODK14/SXVH36 and for the Swan from TEC140/Atik 11000.

Olly

 

[des anderson]

GOBSMACKING!!!!  Des

[david_taurus83]

Hi Olly.

That's a cracking image. I tried this last year with my DSLR and though my 3hr data pales in comparison I had always thought I had done something wrong as it was very red and little else. You've just set my mind at ease now! Thanks!

[Barry-Wilson]

Olly - an image bursting with impact and deep colour from the gorgeous reds.  I would love to be able to image these targets and you have made a very fine job ? but understand your drive to keep improving.

On my monitor the background sky 'appears' slightly magenta/mauve and I cannot tell if this is an illusion because of the abundant Ha reds or whether it is a gentle colour gradient (from adding the Ha I guess).  It certainly isn't strong or over powering but thought I'd raise the question with you.

[simmo39]

All ways a thrill to see your images, gives us lesser mortals something to aim for.

[ollypenrice]

1 hour ago, Barry-Wilson said:

Olly - an image bursting with impact and deep colour from the gorgeous reds.  I would love to be able to image these targets and you have made a very fine job ? but understand your drive to keep improving.

On my monitor the background sky 'appears' slightly magenta/mauve and I cannot tell if this is an illusion because of the abundant Ha reds or whether it is a gentle colour gradient (from adding the Ha I guess).  It certainly isn't strong or over powering but thought I'd raise the question with you.

Thanks Barry. You have an excellent eye and I'll look at this carefully. In the original I felt that the Ha had gone too far into the very dark signal and in sorting that out I may have slewed the background the other way. I really wanted to try to hang onto the golden browns which abound at low brightness close to the galactic centre.

I'll be back!

lly

[Xiga]

An amazing image Olly. So much going on, a massive FoV, rich colours, a nice contrast between the Ha regions and the sky background, and a heck of a lot of colourful stars to boot. 

Like Barry I also see a slight magenta cast to the background, although it could be verifiable for all i know!

[ollypenrice]

14 hours ago, Barry-Wilson said:

Olly - an image bursting with impact and deep colour from the gorgeous reds.  I would love to be able to image these targets and you have made a very fine job ? but understand your drive to keep improving.

On my monitor the background sky 'appears' slightly magenta/mauve and I cannot tell if this is an illusion because of the abundant Ha reds or whether it is a gentle colour gradient (from adding the Ha I guess).  It certainly isn't strong or over powering but thought I'd raise the question with you.

 

7 hours ago, Xiga said:

An amazing image Olly. So much going on, a massive FoV, rich colours, a nice contrast between the Ha regions and the sky background, and a heck of a lot of colourful stars to boot. 

Like Barry I also see a slight magenta cast to the background, although it could be verifiable for all i know!

Thanks for your input, guys. Although I can't see a magenta bias on my monitor the values for green around the background were indeed very low. Here I've given them a slight lift and the image does look better to me subjectively. Has it killed the magenta bias for you? Too much, not enough?

Olly

[wxsatuser]

It looked ok to me on this laptop but there is very faint magenta emission all over that may have caused it.

[Barry-Wilson]

That's better to my eye Olly, especially when the higher resolution image is viewed as you can clearly see charcoal grey patches between the tenuous faint red nebula ?.

[Xiga]

Yep, i see you moved the Green histogram up ever so slightly, and it has definitely made a subtle, but noticeable improvement. ?

Can i ask a technical question if you don't mind? 

I notice you have the Blue histogram peak pushed further up than the other 2 channels. This is obviously intentional, but may i ask why? If i had to guess i'd say it's due to the Oiii in the image, and if you were to bring that blue histogram peak back down to match the other two, then you'd effectively be neutralising a lot of the weaker Oiii signal areas. Is that right, or is there some other reason for it? 

Reason i ask, is because i like to shoot Ha and Oiii myself, and colour balancing is always tricky. Knowing where to accentuate, tone down, balance, neutralise etc can be hard to know. Would you mind showing what your Oiii master looked like for this image? It would be useful to see how far the Oiii extends. 

[Jkulin]

Its a lovely image Olly, wondered if it was my eye sight but it looked a little blue/magenta, so I grabbed the image and took it into PI and used a magenta removal tool, do you think this has ruined it or is it OK?

The stars on my screen look a little better.

I do hope I haven't offended you?

[alacant]

On 10/02/2019 at 16:43, ollypenrice said:

stars are now better

Hi. Better shot than I'd ever have patience for. Wonderful, though It looks like the blue star halos are in the nebula pushing it aside rather than in the foreground. Cheers and clear skies.

[ollypenrice]

On 11/02/2019 at 23:57, Xiga said:

Yep, i see you moved the Green histogram up ever so slightly, and it has definitely made a subtle, but noticeable improvement. ?

Can i ask a technical question if you don't mind? 

I notice you have the Blue histogram peak pushed further up than the other 2 channels. This is obviously intentional, but may i ask why? If i had to guess i'd say it's due to the Oiii in the image, and if you were to bring that blue histogram peak back down to match the other two, then you'd effectively be neutralising a lot of the weaker Oiii signal areas. Is that right, or is there some other reason for it? 

Reason i ask, is because i like to shoot Ha and Oiii myself, and colour balancing is always tricky. Knowing where to accentuate, tone down, balance, neutralise etc can be hard to know. Would you mind showing what your Oiii master looked like for this image? It would be useful to see how far the Oiii extends. 

In truth the blue histo peak is just where it ended up. There's no particular reason for it. The anomaly may simply come from the combination of high res data with widefield which I do by eye.

 

On 12/02/2019 at 00:09, Jkulin said:

Its a lovely image Olly, wondered if it was my eye sight but it looked a little blue/magenta, so I grabbed the image and took it into PI and used a magenta removal tool, do you think this has ruined it or is it OK?

The stars on my screen look a little better.

I do hope I haven't offended you?

Thanks and not offended in the slightest! I asked for feedback and it's been most helpful. Where's the magenta removal tool in PI?

1 hour ago, alacant said:

Hi. Better shot than I'd ever have patience for. Wonderful, though It looks like the blue star halos are in the nebula pushing it aside rather than in the foreground. Cheers and clear skies.

AP is the only activity I do in which I have any patience whatever!  Mysteriously I have it in spades for AP but do everything else in a rush. *  The blue stars near the Swan are very intense, the target is low even from Lat 44, and I found them very hard to control without losing them entirely - which wouldn't be right.

Olly

* Or if I'm not doing it in a rush it's through pure idleness...

[Jkulin]

30 minutes ago, ollypenrice said:

Thanks and not offended in the slightest! I asked for feedback and it's been most helpful. Where's the magenta removal tool in PI?

I had to download it Olly, it's a process that is just a clever pixel math shortcut, I have attached it, load it as you would a normal process icon and then launch.

HTH

Magenta Removal.xpsm

[ollypenrice]

1 hour ago, Jkulin said:

I had to download it Olly, it's a process that is just a clever pixel math shortcut, I have attached it, load it as you would a normal process icon and then launch.

HTH

Magenta Removal.xpsm

Thanks, I'll have a go with that.

Olly

[glowingturnip]

an erudite member of this forum gave me a tip for magenta removal in PI, sadly I can't remember who ?

invert the whole image, apply SCNR (green), re-invert it.  Works a treat

[ollypenrice]

38 minutes ago, glowingturnip said:

an erudite member of this forum gave me a tip for magenta removal in PI, sadly I can't remember who ?

invert the whole image, apply SCNR (green), re-invert it.  Works a treat

Heh heh, now that's not daft!!!

Olly

[Rodd]

Wonderful FOV and I love the palette.  the stars do appear....well.....don't drum me off the forum, but the stars appear a bit unusual.  There seems to be a black ring on teh left side of the stars--may be a registration issue?  I had to take a close look after your introduction--never having seen teh original.  I think these two targets together are teh only way to go.

Rodd

[ollypenrice]

1 hour ago, Rodd said:

Wonderful FOV and I love the palette.  the stars do appear....well.....don't drum me off the forum, but the stars appear a bit unusual.  There seems to be a black ring on teh left side of the stars--may be a registration issue?  I had to take a close look after your introduction--never having seen teh original.  I think these two targets together are teh only way to go.

Rodd

There's a lot of star reduction going on in this image so some artefacts are going to get in. Without the reduction it is just 'starred out.' This certainly isn't processed to be pixel peeped, though: I accept in this processing that it's a widefield image trying to feature nebulosity over stars and high resolution. I think it's important to have a final presentation size in mind and in this case I'd settle for 66%.

Olly

[Rodd]

15 minutes ago, ollypenrice said:

There's a lot of star reduction going on in this image so some artefacts are going to get in. Without the reduction it is just 'starred out.' This certainly isn't processed to be pixel peeped, though: I accept in this processing that it's a widefield image trying to feature nebulosity over stars and high resolution. I think it's important to have a final presentation size in mind and in this case I'd settle for 66%.

That's the advantage of small pixels--you get can get both worlds (this does not assume there are no disadvantages).  Also--hard to admire the High res TEC 140 and CDK 12.5 additions without  a bit of peeping at this scale.

Rodd