M110

[Rodd]

14 minutes ago, wimvb said:

You described that image very well. My point in referring to it was to show that the dust goes very far into the core. But you are absolutely right in stating that his image is flat. The trick is, as you said, to keep a sense of depth and brightness, while also showing detail. I think that Robert Gendler does a better job in his image of the same object. But I believe that he used Hubble and Subaru data.

If you mean yours, definitely not. I think that in that image, you pushed your data as far as it can go.

No I mean the last of my cores--I think it is a bit too far--I tried to improve on the initial M31 core and failed.  The next time I try this will be with the TOA 130 at 1,000mm, and I will use HDR comp--even if I have to do it manually, to try and tame the core and reveal the dust lanes.  Or better yet the C11 Edge--but I don't use it much for deep sky--allot more work and I have to use the STT 8300 and teh filter wheel jams...periodically.  Refractors are so much easier.

Rodd

[Rodd]

3 hours ago, wimvb said:

You described that image very well. My point in referring to it was to show that the dust goes very far into the core

I have done several things using the advice and comments above.  I increased contrast in the dust lanes around the core (the core itself has been tightened up a little, but the center is overexposed and there is no getting around that).  I also worked on M110--it now has color, and the dust lanes and core are easily visible (no sense cropping--view at full resolution and it will be the same as a crop).  Also, I think your Bridge of dreams is visible, at least a hint of it.  Finally--I am pleased with the background and stars.  So unless I can find away to replace the burned core with new data--perhaps integrate 1/4 of the subs and see if I can avoid the burn, this is about as far across the chasm on the bridge I can travel.  I think the disk could have more blue stellar nursey regions, but I don't think its in the data.  NEXT TIME!

Rodd

 

Edited June 2, 2019 by Rodd

[wimvb]

Looks great. The faint bridge is easier to see in the wider view than cropped. That's probably because there's more dark background to create contrast. I noticed the same in my image from last year.

[Stub Mandrel]

8 hours ago, Rodd said:

Ah..I see.  M31 presents quite the challenge--at least my data, because there is a small section in the center that is overexposed.  I replaced the LRGB core with the RGB core to compensate and it really helped.  But there is still a little bit that is burned.  But you got me thinking, maybe if I played with the HDR MMT settings.  Here is an attempt with the scale set at 8 (I usually use 5) and the "to lightness" and "preserve hue" boxes checked.  Also, I used a range mask with the second slider moved to the left to produce a central hole in the mask, so the very center core of the galaxy would not be subjected to the process.  You can still see its a bit [removed word] as they say.  But I think there is a dust lane now visible in there that was not before--its curved and does not look like an artifact to me.  But, all in all, I am not sure I like the "balance"  The concentric type zones in the core are to be avaoided--at least that has been my goal.  But maybe if I fiddle I can get it--then I can transfer it to the big image and that would be something I have been trying to do for a long time....Thanks! 

I'm afrid to my eye the core looks 'oniony'. Here's a sort of reverse stretch, just pulling the curve down, I think you have artefacts in the core but possibly a dust lane as well

The next image is better, but still showing faint concentric rings around the core suggesting its been a bit over-stretched

Really challenging....

Edited June 2, 2019 by Stub Mandrel

[Rodd]

25 minutes ago, Stub Mandrel said:

The next image is better, but still showing faint concentric rings around the core suggesting its been a bit over-stretched

Really challenging....

You are right--I said I failed--took it too far.  This crop is the one that marks the Rubicon--this far and no farther with this data.  I can live with this even though I lose the dust lane in the core--at least there are no artifacts.  To get the core truly right, I think it requires making an image with 10 sec subs and using it to replace the core (HDR Comp in PI--though manual works too).

 

[wimvb]

9 hours ago, Rodd said:

I replaced the LRGB core with the RGB core to compensate 

 

1 hour ago, Stub Mandrel said:

The next image is better, but still showing faint concentric rings around the core suggesting its been a bit over-stretched

Really challenging....

The cause of this effect may very well be the replacement process. As you say: really challenging.

[Stub Mandrel]

11 hours ago, Rodd said:

You are right--I said I failed--took it too far.  This crop is the one that marks the Rubicon--this far and no farther with this data.  I can live with this even though I lose the dust lane in the core--at least there are no artifacts.  To get the core truly right, I think it requires making an image with 10 sec subs and using it to replace the core (HDR Comp in PI--though manual works too).

That does look a lot smoother.

Of course PS users might be tempted to layer the other one on top and use a mask to blend in that last dust lane...  but that would get you drummed out of the PI society!