Veil Revisited

[Rodd]

I used a tool that I rarely use to process data--its called Masked Stretch in Pixinsight.  I typically do not like its effect.  However, I was just not satisfied with any of the images I made from this data--and thre were dozens upon dozens.  So I figured I'd give the Masked Stretch a try as a starting point and proceed from there.  I think it was the way to go, and who knows, maybe it will become a more utilized tool.  The first image is the new one and teh second image, believe it or not, is a toned down version of my previous attempt.  One thing to note is 52 Cygni is now recognizable as  a binary system (it has a companion that is rarely depicted).  If you look close you can see it in this image.  Granted its Ha and OIII and the stars are smaller than RGB--but still.  No previous version of mine revealed the companion to 52 Cygni.  I am not sure I am completely finished with this image--probably not.  But the more I work on it the brighter and more colorful it becomes--I work it right into cartoonville.  I think the details in teh core could be sharper--but I like teh background much more.  One other thing are the rest of the stars.  I did not replace them with Ha stars so tehy are not perfectly white--In my opinion, they are reminiscent of RGB stars--colored but not too saturated.   Am I crasy and this is wishful thinking, or can I finally take my rest?

TOA 130 with ASI 1600 and Astodon 3nm filters

(HaOIII)HOO composition--I integrated the OIII and Ha together and used that as a lum (I did this befroe so nothing new for this image.

Ha: 113 300sec

OIII: 77 300 sec

New

 

Old

Edited November 1, 2019 by Rodd

[simmo39]

Hi Rodd, both fine images but the top one does have the edge.

[MartinB]

It's a beautiful image Rodd and the faint surrounding wisps of nebulosity show very nicely thanks to the overall exposure time.  You've obviously been giving your eyes a bit of a hammering peering at the tiny faint details within the image.  On my laptop screen I can't actually see the difference between the 2 images but I know they will be there.  This is a great image, time to step away from PixInsight, you've had enough lad, give it a rest!

[Rodd]

44 minutes ago, MartinB said:

It's a beautiful image Rodd and the faint surrounding wisps of nebulosity show very nicely thanks to the overall exposure time.  You've obviously been giving your eyes a bit of a hammering peering at the tiny faint details within the image.  On my laptop screen I can't actually see the difference between the 2 images but I know they will be there.  This is a great image, time to step away from PixInsight, you've had enough lad, give it a rest!

Thanks Martin.  I agree. I am a bit surprised that you can’t see the difference though.  Screens are fickle things though, I know.  There is only 1 more step I might take tonight......rgb stars.  Still not sure.

Rodd

[MartinB]

Now looked on my 4K fully calibrated monitor and yes, the later version has a smoother background and more subtle highlights and I think I prefer that later version...although I quite like the apparent dynamic range in the first effort!

[Rodd]

Just now, MartinB said:

Now looked on my 4K fully calibrated monitor and yes, the later version has a smoother background and more subtle highlights and I think I prefer that later version...although I quite like the apparent dynamic range in the first effort!

Well..(and here we go again!) I have made a brightness adjustment.  depending on the screen I look at it was a bit dark.  A very slight tweak seems to make it look a bit better on all my screens.  If I am wrong, I can always call the previous last attempt the final one.  Its the darnedest thing though--just prior to posting, this image looks too bright!--but on teh same monitor as background it looks just right.  This appearance thing has me a bit frustrated.  Anyway--its either this one, or the previous latest attempt.