Mellotte 15 in Ha and HaRGB

[geoflewis]

Having imaged this target a couple of months ago in Ha, I decided to return to it and try for an HaLRGB version. My previous Ha comprised 1.5 hours of 5 min subs, which I've since learnt isn't long enough subs for NB, so I shot another 3 hours at 15 min subs. In addition I captured 9x10 subs for each of RGB and 18x10m L. After grading and stacking the Ha, I used 9 of the 12 and then added them to the previous Ha. After post processing this is what I got...

Next I processed the Ha as R together with the RGB and then layered the Ha using a soft light combine to enhance the detail to get the following L(Ha)HaRGB result...

As can be seen there is virtually no colour in the stars, maybe just a tad of yellow showing, but the blue stars are all saturated, so other than the red nebulosity, I don't see much advantage over the mono Ha only image. In my view, the Ha on it's own shows much more structure in the nebulosity. I probably need to shoot much shorter subs for RGB star colours, so I might try for that another night.

I processed the 3 hours of L that I captured, but couldn't see how it would add anything to the final image, so haven't used it.

I really struggle with HaRGB processing, so any feedback and comments are very welcome. Thanks for looking.

Geof

 

[geoflewis]

So I captured some additional 2 min RGB subs to try and add colour to the stars and reworked it several times without success until I came across a tutorial by Jerry Lodriguss on his Catching the Light website, on how to do this in PS CS2, which is the version that I have. Whilst reprocessing I also applied some additional sharpening using both high pass and unsharp mask filters, plus colour saturation boost. This is the result....

I'd be really interested in feedback on this version, e.g. is it ok, am I on the right track, or have I overdone the colours, saturation, sharpening, etc. I usually go for 'less is more' with my processing, so for me I really pushed the envelope this time, hence would value any feedback.

Cheers,

[knobby]

They're all nice but I think I prefer the original Ha.

[geoflewis]

Just now, knobby said:

They're all nice but I think I prefer the original Ha.

Hi knobby, thanks for the feedback. I agree that the Ha on it's own really shows the detailed nebulosity very well. I think every time I shoot Ha, I like it on it's own as a B&W image more and more. If I may ask, of the 2 colour versions, do you prefer the one with whiter stars, or the one with more colour, sharpening, etc. If no preference then no worries.

Many thanks

[ampleamp]

I know next to nothing about PS so couldn’t even begin to offer anything there but otherwise I will say that I am always surprised about how much additional RGB aids an image. Rightly or wrongly, and depending on the target, I usually try to shoot for a similar length of time of RGB and L/Ha. In any event i always try to get an hour of each RGB channel often in 3-5’ frames. Then you can get into sky quality and chip well depth and all sorts of technicals but I often just use my eye and judgement for what looks right. 
All a bit subjective but I like the final image the best. 

[carastro]

The final image is a big improvement on the previous version from all aspects.

Well done.

Carole 

PS: I just copied your image into Photoshop and increased the colour by using Image Adjust/Match Colour and increasing the Colour intensity slightly.  The star colour just "pops" and the Nebula becomes a richer Maroon colour.  Give it a try and see what you think?

Edited January 2, 2020 by carastro

[geoflewis]

40 minutes ago, ampleamp said:

I know next to nothing about PS so couldn’t even begin to offer anything there but otherwise I will say that I am always surprised about how much additional RGB aids an image. Rightly or wrongly, and depending on the target, I usually try to shoot for a similar length of time of RGB and L/Ha. In any event i always try to get an hour of each RGB channel often in 3-5’ frames. Then you can get into sky quality and chip well depth and all sorts of technicals but I often just use my eye and judgement for what looks right. 
All a bit subjective but I like the final image the best. 

 

5 minutes ago, carastro said:

The final image is a big improvement on the previous version from all aspects.

Well done.

Carole 

PS: I just copied your image into Photoshop and increased the colour by using Image Adjust/Match Colour and increasing the Colour intensity slightly.  The star colour just "pops" and the Nebula becomes a richer Maroon colour.  Give it a try and see what you think?

Thanks both, I'm glad that you don't think that I wasted my time. Thanks for the suggestion Carole, I now recall that you showed me the Match Colour tool at Kelling, but I forgot about it, so is this what you mean? I pushed the intensity slider to 120....

 

[carastro]

Quote

 I now recall that you showed me the Match Colour tool at Kelling, but I forgot about it, so is this what you mean? I pushed the intensity slider to 120....

That's the one.  I must admit I pushed it to 130 but I do have a liking for stronger colours.  It's all a question of personal preference.  It certainly makes a difference though.

Carole 

 

[knobby]

15 hours ago, geoflewis said:

Hi knobby, thanks for the feedback. I agree that the Ha on it's own really shows the detailed nebulosity very well. I think every time I shoot Ha, I like it on it's own as a B&W image more and more. If I may ask, of the 2 colour versions, do you prefer the one with whiter stars, or the one with more colour, sharpening, etc. If no preference then no worries.

Many thanks

The coloured stars version is more natural looking and my preference.

Edited January 3, 2020 by knobby

[tooth_dr]

Quite incredible work there. I initially thought there was a tad too much noise reduction but the more I look at it, now I’m not sure.  I thought my version was good but I just went back and looked at it.  This is in a different league.

[geoflewis]

1 hour ago, tooth_dr said:

Quite incredible work there. I initially thought there was a tad too much noise reduction but the more I look at it, now I’m not sure.  I thought my version was good but I just went back and looked at it.  This is in a different league.

I also wondered if I’d applied too much noise reduction, so thanks for the comment. The additional use of high pass filter did increase noise in the background, so I applied some noise reduction and it was a bit of punt how far to go with that....

Edited January 3, 2020 by geoflewis