Aug 29th Mosaic and a decent closer look at Clavius.

[WestCoastCannuck]

Only did one whole moon shoot....  and it was this 3 panel mosaic with the APM powered up to 1.4X in green 520nm and 183MM camera.    Very interestingly to me,  Neil did a superb mosaic at about the same time, and at the same scale with his big 245 Newt and a different camera.  (See his "Orion Rework" at 100% - the third and last of his images in post).   As I often do,  I added a colour tone to mine....  maybe for a better comparison I will post another in black and white.   Viewed at 100% they are very comparable to me on my 4K monitor but his bigger aperture wins for the details and noise/artifacts when zoomed in past 100% - mine is close though!   Pretty good for a 140mm instrument going up against a much bigger 245mm at the same scale!  LOL  Very fun to have two such mosaics shown in the same orientation at the same scale shot from different parts of the world of our beloved Luna.  :))))))   

 

Following the mosaic, I have posted just a couple of my higher rez attempts with my Vixen VMC200L.   In order to significantly surpass the 140,  I have just realized I must power up the 200mm Vixen to its max.....  and frankly, my seeing does not seem to support this most often.   Still though.....   I am pretty darn happy with my Clavius capture.   A personal best.    

 

The mosaic at 100%

 

A few closer attempts at maxing my Vixen VMC200L.   With 520nm at F13.6 and the 290MM.

Hadley....

 

Vallis Alpes

 

My best Clavius....  happy with this one.

 

A lessor Clavius....  but a nice decent view of the southern limb area.

 

 

Clear skies!!

 

 

Mike

 

 

 

Edited August 31, 2021 by WestCoastCannuck
clarity

[neil phillips]

I also noticed your 140 pulling out nearly as much detail as my 245. Only in certain areas could i even tell that is the case the rill for example i can just make out a hairline crack on the 245. But could not on the 140.  Not really analyzed back and forth but after you said this, the rill is something i know is a stern test so i just checked that,  But i could swear there are some areas where your detail looks better  ? If not more detail, better presented perhaps.  it is amazing a 140 mm scope could compete with a 245mm I will say the 245 under both equally good seeing the 245 will start to pull away a little more  doing high res. Planets of course would be a sterner test. But also a irrelevant one. As the moon doesnt suffer low light the way planets do. I think i also prefer your softer approach. Looks to me like some kind of gaussian sharpening. Or something resembling that ? i take it you do no wavelets ? except deconvolution and unsharp mask Astra image if i am correct ? 

Anyway your mosaic is stunning. Natural smooth gloss superlative detail. And your Clavius again is as natural and highly detailed as anyone could want. or expect from a 140mm scope.  You got me wanting to try some softer approaches now. As i said before you affect my judgement. Not many people do that Mike 

[WestCoastCannuck]

1 hour ago, neil phillips said:

I also noticed your 140 pulling out nearly as much detail as my 245. Only in certain areas could i even tell that is the case the rill for example i can just make out a hairline crack on the 245. But could not on the 140.  Not really analyzed back and forth but after you said this, the rill is something i know is a stern test so i just checked that,  But i could swear there are some areas where your detail looks better  ? If not more detail, better presented perhaps.  it is amazing a 140 mm scope could compete with a 245mm I will say the 245 under both equally good seeing the 245 will start to pull away a little more  doing high res. Planets of course would be a sterner test. But also a irrelevant one. As the moon doesnt suffer low light the way planets do. I think i also prefer your softer approach. Looks to me like some kind of gaussian sharpening. Or something resembling that ? i take it you do no wavelets ? except deconvolution and unsharp mask Astra image if i am correct ? 

Anyway your mosaic is stunning. Natural smooth gloss superlative detail. And your Clavius again is as natural and highly detailed as anyone could want. or expect from a 140mm scope.  You got me wanting to try some softer approaches now. As i said before you affect my judgement. Not many people do that Mike 

Cheers Neil!   The 245 will kill the 140 on closeups in similar seeing.   lol.   You are plenty undersampled in your mosaic "down" to the potential resolution the 140 can do.    The extra light in equal seeing will most certainly give you a cleaner, sharper image.   But...  as you say, in certain areas I am very close!   

 

I don't do wavelets.  May try one day.  In Astra I will do levels first, perhaps  a little contrast, then  I use deconvolution...  lightly,  usually two rounds with the the first being 90 % of the work, and a faint touch in the second.    I rarely use unsharp mask in Astra.    I find the IMPPG implementaion FAR better for that.....  but rarely use it unless I process with ONLY IMPPG.    After deconvolution in Astra I will usually do a slight edge sharpening in Lightroom.....   and some final contrast/shadows perhaps.   For my single pane work with 140 very undersampled,  I do the same, though the settings are VERY different for a good result.    Can use much more aggressive processing and still come out clean.

 

Clavius and the other closeups are with the Vixen.    But thanks!   I really like the shot.   

 

 

Edited August 31, 2021 by WestCoastCannuck

[neil phillips]

6 hours ago, WestCoastCannuck said:

Cheers Neil!   The 245 will kill the 140 on closeups in similar seeing.   lol.   You are plenty undersampled in your mosaic "down" to the potential resolution the 140 can do.    The extra light in equal seeing will most certainly give you a cleaner, sharper image.   But...  as you say, in certain areas I am very close!   

 

I don't do wavelets.  May try one day.  In Astra I will do levels first, perhaps  a little contrast, then  I use deconvolution...  lightly,  usually two rounds with the the first being 90 % of the work, and a faint touch in the second.    I rarely use unsharp mask in Astra.    I find the IMPPG implementaion FAR better for that.....  but rarely use it unless I process with ONLY IMPPG.    After deconvolution in Astra I will usually do a slight edge sharpening in Lightroom.....   and some final contrast/shadows perhaps.   For my single pane work with 140 very undersampled,  I do the same, though the settings are VERY different for a good result.    Can use much more aggressive processing and still come out clean.

 

Clavius and the other closeups are with the Vixen.    But thanks!   I really like the shot.   

 

 

Thanks for the processing stats. Its very interesting to me. Sounds like you spent some time experimenting with the processing on Astra to come up with the deconvolution being done in two stages. Lightly then even lighter a second run. If i have understood you correctly. Never used lightroom. Out of interest what decon are you using lucy richardson ? do you change the amount of iterations and strengths depending on the data ? Hope you dont mind me listening to your regime. As i say its very interesting to me. I love your style so thats why. I may get astra at some point. I remember i liked it when i was using it.  Will i change what i am doing likely not. But more likely tweak it. But you never know. its always worth trying new things to see how you get on i guess. Presently messing with the hi res at full size here, its huge. There is a wavelet setting on registax called gaussian wavelets that produces a similar silky smooth appearance. I generally avoid it. But may have used it many years ago on my 12 " shots. its been so long. I am kind of learning again believe it or not Mike. Forgot so much not everything. But bits

Edited August 31, 2021 by neil phillips

[WestCoastCannuck]

As Trevor once commented to me.....  I also find processing to be a bit of a dark art.   The seeing and conditions are different every time....  and we shoot at different scales, with different power and filters.    No such thing as "stored" settings.   Having said that....  I do have a sort of method now after several years of this.    The "simple deconvolution" I use in  Astra has several sub settings.  For "type"  I use "Van Cittert".   I don't like "Lucy Richardson" (in astra).  For "Blur Kernal Type"  I typically use gaussian....  though when the data is REALLY good I sometimes go for Lorentzian....  its lovely but more subtle.    I set the blur unit size on a single pane APM shot to between 1 and 1.3 for good data.     For that last single panel I did on the 28th...  it was 40 iterations of  "Van Cittert" at 1.2 blur unit size, gaussian and a strength of 1.5.     I did not record my settings for the mosaics.  But usually 30 iterations of about 1.3- 1.5 blur unit size, gaussian,  Van Cittert at a strength of 1- 2 then about 10 iterations at a little less blur unit size and a strength of perhaps 0.5-0.8.

[neil phillips]

14 hours ago, WestCoastCannuck said:

As Trevor once commented to me.....  I also find processing to be a bit of a dark art.   The seeing and conditions are different every time....  and we shoot at different scales, with different power and filters.    No such thing as "stored" settings.   Having said that....  I do have a sort of method now after several years of this.    The "simple deconvolution" I use in  Astra has several sub settings.  For "type"  I use "Van Cittert".   I don't like "Lucy Richardson" (in astra).  For "Blur Kernal Type"  I typically use gaussian....  though when the data is REALLY good I sometimes go for Lorentzian....  its lovely but more subtle.    I set the blur unit size on a single pane APM shot to between 1 and 1.3 for good data.     For that last single panel I did on the 28th...  it was 40 iterations of  "Van Cittert" at 1.2 blur unit size, gaussian and a strength of 1.5.     I did not record my settings for the mosaics.  But usually 30 iterations of about 1.3- 1.5 blur unit size, gaussian,  Van Cittert at a strength of 1- 2 then about 10 iterations at a little less blur unit size and a strength of perhaps 0.5-0.8.

Hey thanks Mike. That information will help me see how good inputs make the difference between bad inputs, as in stabbing in the dark from scratch so to speak. As you say changing data has to be reflected with changing settings to adjust to optimal. There is no one size fits all. Astra looks like something you need to spend some time with seeing the good and bad effects of the changes that can be made in deconvolution. That information gives a heads up the ladder. I only have the trial version so far. So can not save with it. But wanted to play with it to see if i started to see anything either i can use to compliment what i already do. Or completely overhaul it. I suspect the compliment approach  will likely be the outcome. But never say never in this game is what i have learned. Seems alien to me to not use wavelets. But from day one your images caught my eye. That doesnt really happen by chance. But by great work. Really appreciate you telling me your settings in such detail. We are very similar Not everyone in this hobby is so generous believe it or not. it tells me a lot about who the person is i am talking with. And your a gentleman Mike. This time around in my astronomy has been a real pleasure and learning experiance take 2. And you have been a part of that. So much appreciated again. 

[WestCoastCannuck]

32 minutes ago, neil phillips said:

Hey thanks Mike. That information will help me see how good inputs make the difference between bad inputs, as in stabbing in the dark from scratch so to speak. As you say changing data has to be reflected with changing settings to adjust to optimal. There is no one size fits all. Astra looks like something you need to spend some time with seeing the good and bad effects of the changes that can be made in deconvolution. That information gives a heads up the ladder. I only have the trial version so far. So can not save with it. But wanted to play with it to see if i started to see anything either i can use to compliment what i already do. Or completely overhaul it. I suspect the compliment approach  will likely be the outcome. But never say never in this game is what i have learned. Seems alien to me to not use wavelets. But from day one your images caught my eye. That doesnt really happen by chance. But by great work. Really appreciate you telling me your settings in such detail. We are very similar Not everyone in this hobby is so generous believe it or not. it tells me a lot about who the person is i am talking with. And your a gentleman Mike. This time around in my astronomy has been a real pleasure and learning experiance take 2. And you have been a part of that. So much appreciated again. 

You are very welcome Neil!!  We are always learning.   On my side of the fence....  I see the work you and others do on your closeups......  and I want to learn Registax and wavelets.  LOL   Maybe I will get you to show me your tricks!   LOVE that last Clavius.   I hope one day I can do one like that.   Actually...  Astra HAS wavelets.    I have had no luck with it.   Got some more data this morning....  but off with my fam for a few days shortly.   Cheers!!  OH...  btw, when shooting my closer stuff the settings change quite a bit again.  lol.  Can fill you in later.....  but you already do much better with wavelets I think.

 

 

Mike

[neil phillips]

16 minutes ago, WestCoastCannuck said:

You are very welcome Neil!!  We are always learning.   On my side of the fence....  I see the work you and others do on your closeups......  and I want to learn Registax and wavelets.  LOL   Maybe I will get you to show me your tricks!   LOVE that last Clavius.   I hope one day I can do one like that.   Actually...  Astra HAS wavelets.    I have had no luck with it.   Got some more data this morning....  but off with my fam for a few days shortly.   Cheers!!  OH...  btw, when shooting my closer stuff the settings change quite a bit again.  lol.  Can fill you in later.....  but you already do much better with wavelets I think.

 

 

Mike

Of course Mike any trick i know is yours to know. Probably get a bit long winded on here but there is something i wouldnt mind showing you that i am sure will surprise you. So if you dont mind. Maybe i could pm, and show you something you may or may not find useful. I will have to setup a example to show you the effect. But there is no rush if you fancy a chat off the board. 

[WestCoastCannuck]

6 hours ago, neil phillips said:

Of course Mike any trick i know is yours to know. Probably get a bit long winded on here but there is something i wouldnt mind showing you that i am sure will surprise you. So if you dont mind. Maybe i could pm, and show you something you may or may not find useful. I will have to setup a example to show you the effect. But there is no rush if you fancy a chat off the board. 

Will send you PM...   just heading out for a couple days with fam.

[neil phillips]

10 minutes ago, WestCoastCannuck said:

Will send you PM...   just heading out for a couple days with fam.

Have a good time speak later