Jump to content

sgl_imaging_challenge_banner_31.thumb.jpg.b7a41d6a0fa4e315f57ea3e240acf140.jpg

Recommended Posts

I think I need help with my Photoshop settings.   I've been processing my photos and been very unhappy/depressed with the results.  I then realized that they looked a lot better on my phone than on my PC screen.  I  did some testing and I discovered that Photoshop (CS4 -  both 32bit and 64bit) and the basic Windows viewer [the two things I've been using all this time to look at my images] are displaying poorer quality views of  my images than other viewers or programs.  (see attached images)  I think I just noticed this because I just got a CMOS OSC camera and was expecting a lot better than it seemed I was getting.

Do I have something set wrong in Photoshop?  I really don't want to spend the money to get Pixinsight just right now (and the time to learn it) but I need to be able to see what the image really looks like while I'm processing it.

At first I thought the problem was with my monitor, but since I do see the correct image with some programs I've concluded that the issue must be with Photoshop itself.  However, I have no idea at all how to fix it.

I've uploaded two views of an early processing stage of an Andromeda photograph.

 

895923011_AndromedaM31bin2x217-120s8-9-20firsttimeplayingatprocessing-small.jpg.7d5f3c7d780e650e70b07b1c61c50422.jpg

This one shows the image as seen in Gimp, Irfan View, Windows Paint, on-line, the new Windows "Photos" or on other laptops, phones, etc.

 

 

1072713733_photoshopimageofpicture-small.jpg.0b8b5c7724cc04bcb8607d0f40f0cec9.jpg

This one shows the image as seen in Photoshop or in the Windows Photo Viewer or Photo Gallery on my PC.  (I used screen capture to get this but it is accurate for what I see).

As you can see above, the image I'm seeing in Photoshop has problems.  The main problem I notice is that the gradients of color do not flow smoothly but are concentric areas of flat color.  No depth or subtlety.

Can this be fixed and if so what do I need to adjust in Photoshop or my PC?  I'm using Photoshop CS4 and this effect shows up in both the 32bit and 64 bit versions.

Any help would be appreciated.

Thanks and Clear Skies Everyone

Taylor Blanchard

Link to post
Share on other sites

As said, you need to change the mode in PS to use 16 bit rgb.  Its probably set at 8 bit and that's why you get the banding effect.

One word of caution some filters and plugins for PS only work in 8 bit mode so will be greyed out/ won't work in 16 bit.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Not sure about the Photoshop issue but I did have problems with the default Windows photo viewer on Windows 10. They got rid of the Photo viewer that was on Win 7.

The Win7 one was better. The new Win10 one seems to have some sort of auto enhancement going on and seems to make all images sparkly and really pop.  Maybe they think that helps most  photos out, and is better for social media??   But to me, it ruins the images.

You can get the win7 viewer (which is more natural looking to my eye) by running a script in the windows command line, which enables it again.
It seems its still there in the OS, but just not enabled. Also the Win7 viewer can open Camera Raw files too.
Let me know if your interested and I'll dig out the link to the script.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks to everyone who gave suggestions.  I did find the problem.  Photoshop was not pulling up the correct monitor profile and neither was the windows photo viewer.  I found a way to fix it by changing the settings in photoshop:

Assign Working RGB:    sRGB IEC61966-2.1
Check View/Proof Colors

but I had to keep doing that every time I opened an image and even during processing.  Then I found this article that let me change the default setting in Windows Color Management.

https://community.adobe.com/t5/photoshop/always-have-to-enable-quot-proof-colors-quot/td-p/10053422?page=1

That seems to have done the trick.  Now the image looks correct in Photoshop, online and everywhere else.

Thanks again everyone.

Clear Skies

Taylor Blanchard

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • Similar Content

    • By SamK
      After many hours of fiddling round with Registax wavelet settings to process my own solar system images, I've always been curious as to how it actually works. In doing so I've put together my own image sharpening program which does something similar to Registax wavelets. For comparison, I've also added some general purpose deconvolution techniques which you'll probably be familiar with from other image processing software (like Wiener inverse filtering, Richardson-Lucy, etc). In choosing a point spread function to deconvolve with, one suprising result was that the typical stack outputs from Autostakkert work best with a Lorentz point spread function (with a minor modification). Deconvolving with a Gaussian point spread function doesn't really work. Deep-sky images seem to deconvolve best with a Moffat point spread function (which is to be expected - it's already well established that star profiles in long exposures are best approximated with a Moffat function).
      On the whole, it's unlikely that you can sharpen solar system images much more in this program than you already can in Registax. You can see results from Registax wavelet (sharpening layers), inverse filtering (e.g. Wiener), and iterative deconvolution (e.g. Landweber) below. They all give very similar results. In all the techniques there's a similar trade-off between less noise but less detail vs more noise but more detail.
      There are some quick start notes on the first page of the Readme here:
      https://github.com/50000Quaoar/Deconvolvulator/blob/main/Readme.pdf
      There are some examples of deconvolved images here (move mouse over image to see before/after):
      https://50000quaoar.github.io/Deconvolvulator/
      Image credits are on the hyperlinks
      The Windows download is here:
      https://github.com/50000Quaoar/Deconvolvulator/raw/main/Deconvolvulator32.zip
      Example solar system tifs to experiment with are here:
      https://github.com/50000Quaoar/Deconvolvulator/tree/main/image%20examples
      And the project page is here (with Source code in the src folder)
      https://github.com/50000Quaoar/Deconvolvulator
      If anyone finds it useful, do post here how it compares to other tools you use for solar system image sharpening.
      The download and the source code are free, you can use it unrestricted for any purpose. The OpenCV and OpenCVCSharp components which my program use have licence information at the end of the Readme.pdf.
      Sam
       

    • By Pincs
      Hi I've got an 8" dobsonian and I just got a dslr to connect to it. Obviously there's no tracking so what kind of things can I capture. Will I be able to do dso and planets?
      Thanks
    • By astrobena
      Hey everyone,
      I was out recently in what felt like the first clear sky in years and got ~109 min of data on M31, minus 76 frames due to a 12mph wind, which left me with 69 min of data (each shot is 45 sec with ISO 200 tracked with skywatcher star adventurer). As mentioned in the title I captured all these images in a bortal 8 location, used an unmodified canon eos 400d and the skywatcher 75ed as the scope (with a flattener). I've attached my edit (warning: it is not great at all + slightly overedited to see what details are even there), and to be my surprise it looked very similar to an image of M31 with only 20 min of data which i captured a month earlier (both of which i used DSS and photoshop for). Now this may well have something to do with the way i edited it in photoshop or a different setting in DSS or just the fact that 49 more data doesnt make much of a difference considering im in a bortal 8 location, maybe you guys could help on that. I've attached the link to the original files (in the folder called 18.2.2021) as well as the stacked image from DSS (https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/12NT4TmLCXvTfOXNPE_l8UWPRpgO2VjLe?usp=sharing). I didnt capture any flat images but have dark and bias frames, all in their correpsonding folders in the attached link. It would be greatly appreciated if you guys could see if there is more data in this then i have managed to 'extract' using photoshop. (If you use different software and try and edit these files please tell me what you used) If there isn't then maybe do you guys have any images of M31 (or similar) from very light polluted skies that you could share here? (If so i would if you could share the full exposure time and gear that would be great)
       
      Many Thanks!
       

    • By SpaceDave
      Hello all. I’ve tried a few times in the last month to image Mars but have had very little success. Although a decent size, Mars is very blurry and wobbly. I am fairly new to the hobby, but I would say it appears to be poor seeing conditions. 
      I am using a Celestron 6SE and Canon 600D. I have tried 2x and 3x Barlow. I focus using a bahtinov mask (on stars). I used movie crop mode on various ISOs and exposures, stacking at least 3000 frames (keeping the best 1%, 2%, 5%, etc).
      Is Mars too far away now? Or am I underestimating how rarely you get a night of good seeing? How do you find out when the best seeing will be?
    • By endless-sky
      I would like to share my fourth image.
      With my "lucky week" of imaging, along with M33, I managed to finish also this project. This is my longest integration to date.
      These are IC 405 and IC 410, also known as the Flaming Star Nebula and the Tadpole Nebula, respectively, taken over 7 nights, under my Bortle 5/6 home sky.
      Total integration time: 18h 29m 00s.
      Here are the acquisition details:
      Mount: Sky-Watcher NEQ6 Pro
      Telescope: Tecnosky 80/480 APO FPL53 Triplet OWL Series
      Camera: D5300 astromodified
      Reducer/flattener: Tecnosky 4 elements, 0.8x
      Guide-scope: Artesky UltraGuide 60mm f/4
      Guide-camera: ZWO ASI 224MC
      2020/11/18: Number of subs/Exposure time: 41@240s + 1@300s. Notes: L-Pro filter, no Moon
      2020/11/21: Number of subs/Exposure time: 48@300s. Notes: L-Pro filter, Moon 46% illuminated
      2020/11/24: Number of subs/Exposure time: 48@300s. Notes: L-Pro filter, Moon 75% illuminated
      2020/12/07: Number of subs/Exposure time: 15@300s. Notes: L-Pro filter, no Moon
      2020/12/13: Number of subs/Exposure time: 22@300s. Notes: L-Pro filter, no Moon
      2021/01/10: Number of subs/Exposure time: 37@300s. Notes: L-Pro filter, no Moon
      2021/01/11: Number of subs/Exposure time: 18@300s. Notes: L-Pro filter, no Moon
      Total exposure time: 66540s = 18h 29m 00s.
      Pre and post-processing: PixInsight 1.8.8-7.

      This image was particularly hard to process, since there are many bright stars and stretching the nebulosity while taming the stars was quite difficult. I am sure I didn't manage it as well as I would have liked.
      Here's a link to the full resolution image: Flaming Star Nebula (IC 405) and Tadpole Nebula (IC 410)
      Thanks for looking!
      C&C welcome!
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue. By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.