M31 vs.........M31

[Rodd]

I worked and worked, then worked some more, until I was done and  convinced myself that I had made great strides forward.  Now, after a month or so of being away from the image, I look back and am not so sure.   So, without saying which was the original and which was the reprocess, here they are.... a blind test.   Which should I consider the final image?

[Paul2019]

For me its got to be the first one 

Awesome images either way though

[Whirlwind]

Top one.  The colours look more natural to my eye - bottom one has a purplish cast.

[michael.h.f.wilkinson]

Top one for me too. The red from the H-II regions is a bit too garish in the second

[vlaiv]

To my eye - bottom one, colors look more natural.

Only "objection" I have to bottom image would be level of emphasis of Ha regions. I love the color/saturation of it, but it does seem a bit strong. Not sure if I can explain it properly.

Take for example these two regions:

I love the subtle sparse star fields (they should not be emphasized and you did a splendid job there, very subtle) but Ha on the other hand looks like galactic explosion amidst those faint stars. Somehow too strong and a bit out of place.

[Laurin Dave]

The top one Rodd..  Ha looks better

Dave

[spillage]

12 minutes ago, Whirlwind said:

Top one.  The colours look more natural to my eye - bottom one has a purplish cast.

+1 Plus more detail nearer the core.

[don4l]

The top one for me too.  Apart from the Ha, the dust lanes look better to me.

[dave_galera]

+1 for top image

[Rodd]

 

52 minutes ago, Paul2019 said:

For me its got to be the first one 

Awesome images either way though

 

51 minutes ago, Whirlwind said:

Top one.  The colours look more natural to my eye - bottom one has a purplish cast.

 

38 minutes ago, spillage said:

+1 Plus more detail nearer the core.

 

39 minutes ago, vlaiv said:

To my eye - bottom one, colors look more natural.

Only "objection" I have to bottom image would be level of emphasis of Ha regions. I love the color/saturation of it, but it does seem a bit strong. Not sure if I can explain it properly.

Take for example these two regions:

I love the subtle sparse star fields (they should not be emphasized and you did a splendid job there, very subtle) but Ha on the other hand looks like galactic explosion amidst those faint stars. Somehow too strong and a bit out of place.

 

38 minutes ago, Laurin Dave said:

The top one Rodd..  Ha looks better

Dave

 

23 minutes ago, don4l said:

The top one for me too.  Apart from the Ha, the dust lanes look better to me.

 

Well--it appears I wasted my time!!!  the first image was the original.  There are elements of the second image I like better--the stars in the disc are better--with no ringing or artifacts.  the first image stars are weaker.  Also M110 is MUCH better in the second--almost monochrome in the first.  I do like the dust lanes in the first image, but the darkness around the core looks odd--greenish to me. The duist lanes in the second image, while not as dark, are much sharper, and I think the image has a better balance, but the first image has a better defined extended galactic disc glow--this is evident in the dust lanes visible at the top end--especially on the underside.  The first image has a better blue star element around the spiral arms. If I remember coorectly--I think teh background and outer regions of the galaxy are less noisy in the 2nd image.

As you can see--I am torn.  But who can argue with the overwhelming majority.  Vlad!  I see your point about the Ha.  When I add it I do so in its entirety and have little control over different parts.  I do agree that

Ha is a bit to pronounced in the second--but perhaps a bit understated in the first.  

Oh no...back to the drawing board?!

[Scott]

Yep, me too. I also think the Ha is being pushed to hard in the bottom one. Oddly, the same can be said for the dustlanes in the top one yet I find it very pleasing, at least to my eye. 
All being said, I'd be over the moon with either 🙌

[vlaiv]

2 minutes ago, Rodd said:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Well--it appears I wasted my time!!!  the first image was the original.  There are elements of the second image I like better--the stars in the disc are better--with no ringing or artifacts.  the first image stars are weaker.  Also M110 is MUCH better in the second--almost monochrome in the first.  I do like the dust lanes in the first image, but the darkness around the core looks odd--greenish to me. The duist lanes in the second image, while not as dark, are much sharper, and I think the image has a better balance, but the first image has a better defined extended galactic disc glow--this is evident in the dust lanes visible at the top end--especially on the underside.  The first image has a better blue star element around the spiral arms. If I remember coorectly--I think teh background and outer regions of the galaxy are less noisy in the 2nd image.

As you can see--I am torn.  But who can argue with the overwhelming majority.  Vlad!  I see your point about the Ha.  When I add it I do so in its entirety and have little control over different parts.  I do agree that

Ha is a bit to pronounced in the second--but perhaps a bit understated in the first.  

Oh no...back to the drawing board?!

If it is any consolation, I appreciate effort that went into second image, and like I said, to my eye it is indeed better rendition, more natural, very sharp. If you could just do something with that Ha (I'm not even sure what needs to be done - maybe give it a bit of "airy" feel like its a gas, which it is , but don't loose red hue and saturation - it is spot on) it would indeed be almost perfect rendition.

[Rodd]

7 minutes ago, Scott said:

Oddly, the same can be said for the dustlanes in the top

I agree--that is one of the reasons why reprocessed the image--the dust lanes were too dark!  

Rodd

[Rodd]

11 minutes ago, vlaiv said:

If it is any consolation, I appreciate effort that went into second image, and like I said, to my eye it is indeed better rendition, more natural, very sharp. If you could just do something with that Ha (I'm not even sure what needs to be done - maybe give it a bit of "airy" feel like its a gas, which it is , but don't loose red hue and saturation - it is spot on) it would indeed be almost perfect rendition.

Now we have a conundrum my friend....While it is true you are the sole hold out, it is also true that I value you opinion greatly.....hmmmmm.  I do have the stacks and can "try again"--but that seems absurd (there has been A LOT of agains!).  I suppose I could alternate the final image in my AB page, one day #1 the next #2.     I will see what I can do about the Ha......the first step will be to make a very good mask so it can be isolated.  that should not be too difficult as I have the Ha stack and all the stacks are registered.  The difficulty is, as I am sure you know, deciphering your suggestion.   Of course the simplest thing would be to pick one and be content.........................nah!

Rodd

[Scott]

9 minutes ago, Rodd said:

(there has been A LOT of agains!).  

Rodd

I wouldn't let the opinion of a bunch of frustrated (By clouds ) astronomers sway you too much. No doubt you know this image far more intimately than any of us.

[Rodd]

6 minutes ago, Scott said:

I wouldn't let the opinion of a bunch of frustrated (By clouds ) astronomers sway you too much. No doubt you know this image far more intimately than any of us.

One can get too close........Besides, I really am torn.....One minute its #1 the next its #2,   I appreciate the comments

Rodd

[Mr niall]

Sorry bit late to the party. Definitely the top one for me too. Just has that little more "punch", and that makes all the difference.

Both absolute crackers btw.

[Rodd]

7 minutes ago, Mr niall said:

Sorry bit late to the party. Definitely the top one for me too. Just has that little more "punch", and that makes all the difference.

Both absolute crackers btw.

Thanks Mr. niall. 

By the way everyone....it makes a big difference which screen I use.  The sharpness of the second one really comes out on a 4K screen (or an iphone or IPAD screen

Rodd

[Erling G-P]

Like the majority, I also prefer the first one, with the more extended and more blue outer regions, and slightly more subdued ha regions.  Do prefer the core and the smaller stars, and star colours of the second one though, so if a mix was possible...     Both are astonishing though and I would be very proud of either one !!

[vlaiv]

Ok, I have to say it - for everyone preferring the first image, please look at following:

Look at those tight stars and resolved NGC206 of second image:

You really think that this one is better (first image)?:

Or for example this (again second image):

vs first image:

What's with the green cast? Or forcibly sharp stars (they have ring around them - not so in second image). Look at fidelity of dust lanes in second image vs this one, and again lack of sharpness and resolution.

To add one more comparison, and then I'll rest my case

Look at this background definition and "fidelity" in second image:

By comparison, this is the first image:

Do I need to explain which one is better (what's with the blue cast on the background, where has that clearness/sharpness gone, ...)?

Sorry Rodd for being so harsh on your first processing, but reality is, second one is major improvement (again to my eyes ).

[Laurin Dave]

Agree v2 looks significantly better in close up.. (apart from for me the Ha) ..   lesson learned don’t make judgements based on looking on the phone.  

Thanks Vlaiv..  apologies Rodd

 

[Rodd]

3 hours ago, vlaiv said:

Sorry Rodd for being so harsh on your first processing, but reality is, second one is major improvement (again to my eyes ).

Thanks Vlad....On many levels, not the least of which is verification that I am NOT crazy after all!   The best I could do was switch back and forth from image to image on the screen--but there is always a delay and close comparisons are not easy to make unless you resort to the type of comparison you demonstrated.  Even the blink tool in Pixinsight wasn't as good as your crops.  

Anyway--thank you for taking the time to really look at the image.  It is much appreciated and now I can relax!  You have convinced me.  

Rodd

[Jkulin]

Top one for me Rodd, I can only dream about producing an M31 as good as that😎

[Rodd]

15 minutes ago, Jkulin said:

Top one for me Rodd, I can only dream about producing an M31 as good as that😎

Thanks John.  

Rodd

[spillage]

Now I am on the works pc I must say the bottom one does look much better. I really think you will never get a perfect answer due to discrepancies in monitors. I guess I just get my images to look the best I can on my kit and just have to accept that others may not like the results.