Jump to content

Stargazers Lounge Uses Cookies

Like most websites, SGL uses cookies in order to deliver a secure, personalised service, to provide social media functions and to analyse our traffic. Continued use of SGL indicates your acceptance of our cookie policy.

sgl_imaging_challenge_banner_dslr_mirrorlesss_winners.thumb.jpg.9deb4a8db27e7485a7bb99d98667c94e.jpg

Rodd

NGC7000 and Friend

Recommended Posts

Another image with a long processing history--like a dusty battlefield.  A slight windows system tweak is what it needed.   FSQ 106 with .6x reducer and ASI 1600 with 3nm Astrodon filters.  About 9.5 hours.

 

NA.thumb.jpg.232405b6ad250411032ef48d335421aa.jpg

 

Edited by Rodd
  • Like 16

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wow, stunning such tight control of the stars, an area where i need to improve though this is by far not the only area. Those Tak scope really do punch their weight.

Alan

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, alan potts said:

Wow, stunning such tight control of the stars, an area where i need to improve though this is by far not the only area. Those Tak scope really do punch their weight.

Alan

Thanks Alan. With the .6x reducer the FL is only 318 mm.  That combined with the small pixels helps keep the stars very small

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Great image Rodd. Processing nightmare I guess.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Quite beautiful Rodd.

Tell me how you managed to only show the brightest stars (which are small) and not show any of the background smaller stars at all.  Did you do a starless image and then put the brighter ones back?

Carole 

Edited by carastro

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, fwm891 said:

Great image Rodd. Processing nightmare I guess.

Thanks Francis.    Not too bad.  Not clipping the foreground dust was a bit of a challenge, as was palette--but that is pretty typical for me.  This target is very bright, with a nice strong signal, so that really helped keep noise down

Rodd

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, carastro said:

Quite beautiful Rodd.

Tell me how you managed to only show the brightest stars (which are small) and not show any of the background smaller stars at all.  Did you do a starless image and then put the brighter ones back?

Carole 

Thanks Carole--no, I do not know how to do a starless image.  I don't recall the specifics of this processing--most of which was completed a while ago.  The recent tweaks did not impact the stars at all.  In general, I use morphological transformation a little (I do not like to use a lot) and I reduce star brightness by creating a very tight fitting star mask (usually covers all but the largest stars) and using curves to gently bring down brightness.  Also, sometimes I use a star mask to cover the stars while gently stretching the image with the histogram tool.   One thing I do with SHO images--or I used to do all the time and now I do only sometime is replace the SHO stars with Ha stars--which tend to be smaller.  Probably a combination of things helped keep the stars at bay.

Rodd

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, glowingturnip said:

loving the zoom-in detail on that, very very nice

Thanks Stuart.   That is one attribute of the short focal length, mid sized sensor, and small pixels that I like (widish FOV and higher than normal resolution for the FOV)--it provides for crops that can stand alone as images--or, as you note, it lets one zoom in and pan around.  

Rodd

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, apophisOAS said:

Ditto everyone's comments,such great fine detail , shows all the hard work!🤩

Roger

Thanks Roger.....someday it will get easy..........I hope

 

Rodd

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Flawless, Rodd.

Olly

Edited by ollypenrice
Typo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, ollypenrice said:

Flawless, Rodd.

Olly

Thanks Olly...you are too kind.  It does make me want to get back to the FSQ and .6x reducer though.  Lots of appropriate targets are on the rise.

Rodd

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.