Moon Mosaic Bresser 127L IR UV CUT 495 LONGPASS

[neil phillips]

Although more disturbed seeing Using UV IR CUT and a Baarder 495 LONGPASS combined. Getting a much sharper image. Achro refractors respond better in my opinion. to the IR UV 495 Combo better than IR685 Why i am not exactly sure. Likely those out of focus wavelengths in achromatic optics. Better controlled with this combination of filters. Its not a focus thing. As i have noticed it numerous times with 3 different achro refractors. It requires far less sharpening 

50 % and 75 mosaics. ZWO 178M camera prime focus Thanks to Brian who sold me the scope. And john in derby. Who talked me through sorting out backlash on the focuser

50% reduction. To keep it tighter under disturbed seeing 2x celestron ultima Barlow UVIR CUT 495 LONGPASS

 

50%

75%

Edited August 27, 2021 by neil phillips

[WestCoastCannuck]

This is realy nice work Neil.  I love the views with Petavius...  actually I love all the closeups.   For the Mosaic, I like the larger 75% view best.   Interesting info on the filters!!

 

Look forward to more!

 

Mike

[neil phillips]

39 minutes ago, WestCoastCannuck said:

This is realy nice work Neil.  I love the views with Petavius...  actually I love all the closeups.   For the Mosaic, I like the larger 75% view best.   Interesting info on the filters!!

 

Look forward to more!

 

Mike

Hi Mike Thanks.

One thing i cant determine is, i am processing on a laptop that has a rather average screen. I have the brightness full up. Been doing all my processing on there. When i looked on my 50" plasma tv the mosaic images seemed very dark. So its got me wondering if i need a better screen to process on. From what your seeing your end Mike. Does the mosaics look overly dark to you. Brightness wise how would you rate the balance. I did originally have it with a gamma lift, as i liked the effect on the dark terminator. Then i noticed some odd differences in brightness on the sky background ( caused by doing auto complete on ice ) that i didnt notice. So i then darkened it again. Really should have redone it. But the data is only average so didnt bother. But still interested on what your seeing your end brightness darkness wise. Here it looks fine. If you think its off it would help if i knew. As stated its looks totally fine this end but i dont trust the discrepancy between the TV and laptop. Cheers for your opinion. 

[WestCoastCannuck]

1 hour ago, neil phillips said:

Hi Mike Thanks.

One thing i cant determine is, i am processing on a laptop that has a rather average screen. I have the brightness full up. Been doing all my processing on there. When i looked on my 50" plasma tv the mosaic images seemed very dark. So its got me wondering if i need a better screen to process on. From what your seeing your end Mike. Does the mosaics look overly dark to you. Brightness wise how would you rate the balance. I did originally have it with a gamma lift, as i liked the effect on the dark terminator. Then i noticed some odd differences in brightness on the sky background ( caused by doing auto complete on ice ) that i didnt notice. So i then darkened it again. Really should have redone it. But the data is only average so didnt bother. But still interested on what your seeing your end brightness darkness wise. Here it looks fine. If you think its off it would help if i knew. As stated its looks totally fine this end but i dont trust the discrepancy between the TV and laptop. Cheers for your opinion. 

IT all comes down to what we are viewing with....   makes it really hard for us to share our stuff the way we want!  Things simply willl look different depending on the screen of the viewer.    My current monitor is not calibrated yet.    Your images in this post seem fine for brightness.....  on the low end of  average to me on my monitor.    Contrast also is a bit low for me on full discs -  but also has advantages.  Contrast seems good to me on closeups.

 

Mike

Edited August 28, 2021 by WestCoastCannuck

[neil phillips]

46 minutes ago, WestCoastCannuck said:

IT all comes down to what we are viewing with....   makes it really hard for us to share our stuff the way we want!  Things simply willl look different depending on the screen of the viewer.    My current monitor is not calibrated yet.    Your images in this post seem fine for brightness.....  on the low end of  average to me on my monitor.    Contrast also is a bit low for me on full discs -  but also has advantages.  Contrast seems good to me on closeups.

 

Mike

Ok Thanks even that tells me a lot. And comments on contrast makes perfect sense, as i processed them like that. If ever i get good data. ( its been awful lately ) it will be good to know i am not miles off. Perhaps a touch brighter with a touch more contrast. Thinking of getting another screen out of interest what did you get again ? 

[WestCoastCannuck]

I don't know a lot about current monitors....  I am pretty happy with this one though.  Was on sale.  LG 27UL500-W 27-Inch UHD (3840 x 2160) IPS Monitor. 

[Trevor N]

Some really nice images there Neil. I think the screen debate is very valid. It’s an area that I struggle with so I’ll read all comments with interest. Trevor 

[Pete Presland]

Very nice set of images Neil, plent of nice details visible there.

As for the screen calibration, its something that has bothered me for ages. I do occasionally go through inbuilt Windows screen calibration, not sure hoe effective it though.

[neil phillips]

2 hours ago, Pete Presland said:

Very nice set of images Neil, plent of nice details visible there.

As for the screen calibration, its something that has bothered me for ages. I do occasionally go through inbuilt Windows screen calibration, not sure hoe effective it though.

Thanks again Pete. Although the laptop i am using is quite good AMD RYZEN 4700 series. The screen is nothing special. So even with calibration. i wouldnt trust it, looking into 4 k screens.