3 mosaics from April - redone. APM140 and 183MM

[WestCoastCannuck]

I just today started my first of 12 days off...  naturally in the wee hours this morning with a lovely high moon it was totally socked in.    So...  I went over some of my old stuff and re-did them.   3 piece mosaics shot at F9.8 on my APM140/7 on April 16th and 17th.   I am also sharing a redo of a mosaic from April 19th I reworked a couple weeks ago for a virtual presentation I gave to the local RASC.

Hope I get a chance to do more like these soon.

I still feel that my recent 4K monitor switch has resulted in oversharpening my stuff.   Would like feedback on that.

Thanks!

 

Mike

 

April 16th - 3 piece mosaic

 

April 17th 3 piece mosaic

 

April 19th 4 piece mosaic

 

Clear skies to us all!

 

Mike

Edited August 27, 2021 by WestCoastCannuck
typo

[neil phillips]

First the data is great. I havent had data here like that. As to your question about sharpening for sure you are sharpening more than you used to. Whatever i say will likely be challenged on here after i say it. ( can be a theme on forums ) Anyway i think you may be marginally forcing the second image a little bit. It works in a detail way because the data is so good its quite striking how much fine detail is there. But to my eye in certain areas perhaps just a touch less might benefit the naturalness that i was first wowed by. When i first saw your images. The detail is superlative. and one mans meat is anothers poison. So others may not agree. Which is fine. But i think thats what i am seeing. But its hard to trust my screen Mike so is only a impression.  Looking at the last image it looks more natural. But i am noticing certain areas look less forced than others. Probably noise appearing in the brighter areas more than the darker areas and the sharpening highlighting it a little more in those places. I am sure you know what i mean. Its difficult to give a answer at this level Mike. Because its one of those things where i could look again. and maybe change my mind. But i will say. your images are being sharpened more. More like i would do actually if i had that data. Not overly soft. as i have seen on some of your previous shots. So i think your getting close to optimal. Some areas look perfect. others do not. As they are responding differently.  Btw what are you doing to sharpen think i remember you say you used astra image i used that myself many years ago. Maybe i should get it again ? 

Edited August 28, 2021 by neil phillips

[WestCoastCannuck]

55 minutes ago, neil phillips said:

First the data is great. I havent had data here like that. As to your question about sharpening for sure you are sharpening more than you used to. Whatever i say will likely be challenged on here after i say it. ( can be a theme on forums ) Anyway i think you may be marginally forcing the second image a little bit. It works in a detail way because the data is so good its quite striking how much fine detail is there. But to my eye in certain areas perhaps just a touch less might benefit the naturalness that i was first wowed by. When i first saw your images. The detail is superlative. and one mans meat is anothers poison. So others may not agree. Which is fine. But i think thats what i am seeing. But its hard to trust my screen Mike so is only a impression.  Looking at the last image it looks more natural. But i am noticing certain areas look less forced than others. Probably noise appearing in the brighter areas more than the darker areas and the sharpening highlighting it a little more in those places. I am sure you know what i mean. Its difficult to give a answer at this level Mike. Because its one of those things where i could look again. and maybe change my mind. But i will say. your images are being sharpened more. More like i would do actually if i had that data. Not overly soft. as i have seen on some of your previous shots. So i think your getting close to optimal. Some areas look perfect. others do not. As they are responding differently.  Btw what are you doing to sharpen think i remember you say you used astra image i used that myself many years ago. Maybe i should get it again ? 

Thanks much for your very considered reply Neil!    It is as I suspected.  My processing IS different....  and it is now obvious why to me after chatting with another friend.   The pixels on my  27 inch 4K monitor are one HALF the size of my former 24 inch 1080P monitor.    I used to agonize over processing....  was extremely difficult to get results I was satisfied with.   Now, not so much.    I must find a way to hook up my old monitor as well.    I know it can be done easily...  I just have never done it before.   I will continue to use 4K......  but I will have a quick peek at the result on the old monitor.  Hopefully that does not cause me too much stress!   LOL

In answer to your question on processing,  I used to use Astra Image almost exclusively.  The third image I only partially reworked....  it was done with Astra.    The first two were done with Astra originally, and I reworked them using IMPPG.     I still prefer the look of Astra Image for most full discs...... though I seem to be mostly switching over to IMPPG.    For closeups I use IMPPG almost exclusively.     Great free program worth playing with if you have never used it.    The simplest prgram out there I think....  but yet still very powerful within its narrow scope.   lol    IMPPG is SO fast to use.   If I have a lot of data to crunch through....  its a no brainer - I will process with IMPPG.    I can get a result I am satisfied with very quickly.    Astra Image is a vastly more powerful program with seemingly infinite options for what to do....  but it is also slower and its "preview" is not as friendly and useful as the one in IMPPG.    For images I think are really good.....  I will process in both - and pick which I like better.

 

Cheers

 

Mike

Edited August 28, 2021 by WestCoastCannuck

[neil phillips]

No thank you for the information, its very interesting to me. Just hope i am helping with any input to you. Was just out with the 102 F11 trying to view between cloud. Losing the highest moon ive had for ages, no imaging. Barely could get a look between cloud. If it doesnt perk up soon, ive lost this months showing. Seeing is just not good here. the bresser shots were taken under poor seeing. But anyway as ive said before, that 140 your using seriously rocks. its just fine tuning where your at to be honest. Top of your game Mike

Edited August 28, 2021 by neil phillips

[WestCoastCannuck]

Thanks Neil.  Your feedback helps tons.  I don't see any noise or artifacts...  and believe me I look for them!  Lol I am certain were I to look at your screen that I would agree with your assessment.   Its simply because my pixels on my screen are so small.  Will have to ponder this.   As to my game...  I am pretty happy with smaller scope results!  But my efforts with bigger need more work and practice on all aspects!  It's such a great thing to to with free time.

 

I feel your pain on weather.   Seeing is the problem for us.  Get some good seeing here yes!  But rarely.   😆 

With TWO new scopes the crap weather and seeing would be tough to take.  Hope we both have good conditions tonight!  I am aiming for sleeping very shortly and being up before 5 to catch meridian.  If I can see it.  Lol

Cheers

 

Mike

[CraigT82]

Very nice shots Mike, always fun to go over old stuff again and see what you can get out of it now. 

With these three images I think it comes down to how you view the image. I know some will view the images at 100% and zoom no further, in which case these images are pin sharp and faultless really. If you go further in and really zoom down to 200-300% they do start to look a bit too crisp maybe... But that's nit picking really.

So I guess it comes to how you wish your image to be viewed: at 100% or even further in.

Personally I usually try to process so that the image looks right when viewed really close in, which may leave it looking a little soft at 100%. 

 

[neil phillips]

2 hours ago, WestCoastCannuck said:

Thanks Neil.  Your feedback helps tons.  I don't see any noise or artifacts...  and believe me I look for them!  Lol I am certain were I to look at your screen that I would agree with your assessment.   Its simply because my pixels on my screen are so small.  Will have to ponder this.   As to my game...  I am pretty happy with smaller scope results!  But my efforts with bigger need more work and practice on all aspects!  It's such a great thing to to with free time.

 

I feel your pain on weather.   Seeing is the problem for us.  Get some good seeing here yes!  But rarely.   😆 

With TWO new scopes the crap weather and seeing would be tough to take.  Hope we both have good conditions tonight!  I am aiming for sleeping very shortly and being up before 5 to catch meridian.  If I can see it.  Lol

Cheers

 

Mike

That has to be the difference. is the screen resolution making different appearances. The noise i think i am seeing is very fine grain noise. It shows itself very subtly more in certain areas than others. The appearance is similar to what i have seen with the finest sharpening top wavelet registax. But in this case, must be imppg sharpening routines. As i say its very subtle. i am used to seeing similar over the years in my own images. is likely why i am noticing. And i can see it at 100% But is likely what Craig is mentioning when he zooms in. Its a subtle thing though Mike that i have become sensitive to over the years. Likely why i noticed it at all. I can also see it on the 102 shot on the other post. It betrays itself as thousands of tiny sand like grains certain areas are more noticeable than others.  For the most part with the amount of detail your extracting. likely not worth worrying about.  But you asked the question. As a comparison my recent shots which are showing far far less detail lets not forget. The quality is not as good,  i can not see it. Btw when you check are you checking with JPGs I am actually wondering if its a compression thing. I dont think so though. 

Edited August 28, 2021 by neil phillips

[callisto]

Nice and crisp...thanks for sharing 

 

Mark

[WestCoastCannuck]

4 hours ago, CraigT82 said:

Very nice shots Mike, always fun to go over old stuff again and see what you can get out of it now. 

With these three images I think it comes down to how you view the image. I know some will view the images at 100% and zoom no further, in which case these images are pin sharp and faultless really. If you go further in and really zoom down to 200-300% they do start to look a bit too crisp maybe... But that's nit picking really.

So I guess it comes to how you wish your image to be viewed: at 100% or even further in.

Personally I usually try to process so that the image looks right when viewed really close in, which may leave it looking a little soft at 100%. 

 

Great feedback thanks!!   And VERY interesting to me!   I NEVER view at higher than 100%  lol   Something I will be sure to do from now on just to see how things look!

 

3 hours ago, neil phillips said:

That has to be the difference. is the screen resolution making different appearances. The noise i think i am seeing is very fine grain noise. It shows itself very subtly more in certain areas than others. The appearance is similar to what i have seen with the finest sharpening top wavelet registax. But in this case, must be imppg sharpening routines. As i say its very subtle. i am used to seeing similar over the years in my own images. is likely why i am noticing. And i can see it at 100% But is likely what Craig is mentioning when he zooms in. Its a subtle thing though Mike that i have become sensitive to over the years. Likely why i noticed it at all. I can also see it on the 102 shot on the other post. It betrays itself as thousands of tiny sand like grains certain areas are more noticeable than others.  For the most part with the amount of detail your extracting. likely not worth worrying about.  But you asked the question. As a comparison my recent shots which are showing far far less detail lets not forget. The quality is not as good,  i can not see it. Btw when you check are you checking with JPGs I am actually wondering if its a compression thing. I dont think so though. 

 

Thanks again Neil!  More great info.   This is just what I needed.   

 

Well....  its 3:16 AM and I can see the moon through very light clouds/haze.   Fog is forecast.  Scopes outside cooling off.   See what I get.     Now to make a coffee and setup.

 

Cheers!!

 

Mike

Edited August 28, 2021 by WestCoastCannuck

[WestCoastCannuck]

1 hour ago, callisto said:

Nice and crisp...thanks for sharing 

 

Mark

Thanks Mark!!   

[Trevor N]

Very good shots there Mike. I have similar problems between screens on my laptop and PC. I am also very guilty of over sharpening and agree with your opinion that what you “see” changes over time. Seeing some of the super smooth but detailed images on this forum made me re-think what I was trying to achieve.

This next comment is much more subjective and perhaps it’s only me. I have re-worked images and spent ages looking for a bit more detail, convinced myself it’s better than the first and then had to accept it’s worse and I’ve gained nothing!
I also find it difficult to replicate what I see visually in an image. A refractor image in good seeing and at reasonable power seems to display more fine detail than you can take in sometimes. I wonder if we get tempted to over sharpen to try and replicate that memory.

It’s great to share ideas and thoughts here and one thing I have learned from you, Neil and others is it must look natural in the final process. 
Very interesting comments in this thread. Trevor