IC410 with RGB stars

[Skipper Billy]

I havent imaged fror over a year due to illness but thankfully I am fixed and back in action although extremely rusty and out of practise!!

This is the first time I have tried putting RGB stars into a narrowband image. I think its come out OK??

I imaged IC410 (Tadpole Nebula) over 3 nights. 2 nights were spent gathering Ha, SII and OIII data (3 hours in 600 second subs binned 1x1 for each) for the nebula and one night gathering RGB data (1 hour in 120 second subs binned 1x1 for each) for the RGB stars.

I removed the stars from the narrowband image and processed it without stars. Then I processed the RGB image to get the correct colour stars, removed the stars and added the RGB stars to the narrowband image (processed in Hubble Pallette).

The images were processed entirely in Pixinsight using a full set of darks, bias and flats for each filter.

It's great to be back again !!!

 

[AKB]

Glad to see you back at the helm, Skipper!

Tony

[tomato]

Looks good to me, I just need to remember to register all of the images to be used, so the stars end up in the right place.

Glad you are back, and you still have some astro darkness from this season to go at!👍

[ollypenrice]

OK, I'm not so sure about the rationale behind using two palettes in the same image. I can certainly see the point if, like HOO, the palette closely resembles RGB but the Hubble is in flat contradiction with RGB. I'd be more inclined to combine RGB stars with HOO. I think this would look more consistent.

Olly

[mackiedlm]

Good to see you back. And thats a great image to return with

 

[Skipper Billy]

19 hours ago, ollypenrice said:

OK, I'm not so sure about the rationale behind using two palettes in the same image. I can certainly see the point if, like HOO, the palette closely resembles RGB but the Hubble is in flat contradiction with RGB. I'd be more inclined to combine RGB stars with HOO. I think this would look more consistent.

I have looked at it again in the cold light of day and you are absolutely right - it looks ridiculous!

I have processed it again from scratch and left the stars alone. I am very rusty at processing after an 18 month absence but I am happier with this version than the first one. I might have another go as I think I have overcooked the star reduction and sharpness.

 

IC410 TADPOLE NEBULA.tif

[ollypenrice]

50 minutes ago, Skipper Billy said:

I have looked at it again in the cold light of day and you are absolutely right - it looks ridiculous!

I have processed it again from scratch and left the stars alone. I am very rusty at processing after an 18 month absence but I am happier with this version than the first one. I might have another go as I think I have overcooked the star reduction and sharpness.

 

IC410 TADPOLE NEBULA.tif 35.35 MB · 0 downloads

I think that's much nicer.

Have you tried Russ Croman's Noise Xterminator? It is utterly astounding and miles ahead of any other NR routine I've tried. It probably came along while you were out of action and I think it would be ideal for this image.

Olly

[Stuart1971]

1 hour ago, Skipper Billy said:

I have looked at it again in the cold light of day and you are absolutely right - it looks ridiculous!

I have processed it again from scratch and left the stars alone. I am very rusty at processing after an 18 month absence but I am happier with this version than the first one. I might have another go as I think I have overcooked the star reduction and sharpness.

 

IC410 TADPOLE NEBULA.tif 35.35 MB · 0 downloads

Yea this looks superb, much better…👏🏻👏🏻

can I ask how or why you have spikes in the stars with a tak 106… are the optics pinched slightly…?

I used to have the Tak 85 and got lighthouse beam effect on bright stars which was normal for that scope, but you have full blown spikes..🤔

[tooth_dr]

3 hours ago, Stuart1971 said:

…you have full blown spikes..

I can’t see Davids equipment list, but these small neat little spikes are reminiscent of what I got with the microlenses on the Kodak KAF8300 sensor.

Edited January 15 by tooth_dr
Wrong name!

[Stuart1971]

4 minutes ago, tooth_dr said:

I can’t see Peters equipment list, but these small neat little spikes are reminiscent of what I got with the microlenses on the Kodak KAF8300 sensor.

Peter…?

It was Skipper Billy’s image, and he has the Tak 106 with Atik 16200 CCD camera..

[tooth_dr]

1 minute ago, Stuart1971 said:

Peter…?

It was Skipper Billy’s image, and he has the Tak 106 with Atik 16200 CCD camera..

The 16200 might be the reason for the spikes, if it shares the same architecture as the 8300.

[Stuart1971]

Just now, tooth_dr said:

The 16200 might be the reason for the spikes, if it shares the same architecture as the 8300.

Hmmm, I have had a few Atik CCD in my time and never seen that, I think @ollypenrice used to use an Atik 16200 too, just never noticed the spikes before, especially with a frac…but then maybe you re correct…👍🏻

[tooth_dr]

4 minutes ago, Stuart1971 said:

Hmmm, I have had a few Atik CCD in my time and never seen that, I think @ollypenrice used to use an Atik 16200 too, just never noticed the spikes before, especially with a frac…but then maybe you re correct…👍🏻

It was always in my KAF8300 images (I had three of those cameras) and I had an Atik 16200 as well, artefacts of the sensor, but quite pleasing imo to look at 👍🏼

[TakMan]

Hi can confirm it is an ‘artifact’ of the OnSemi Kodak 16200 chip (the big brother of the 8300 chip), as SkipperBilly and myself share the same scope/camera combination…

I personally quite like the little ‘diffraction’ spikes!

Damian

[TakMan]

21 minutes ago, Stuart1971 said:

Hmmm, I have had a few Atik CCD in my time and never seen that, I think @ollypenrice used to use an Atik 16200 too, just never noticed the spikes before, especially with a frac…but then maybe you re correct…👍🏻

I wonder Stuart if you had an Atik with a Sony CCD sensor…? Different chip architecture/microlenses….

[old_eyes]

Welcome back. A nice image to start with.

I am not sure I agree with @ollypenrice. I think your two palette image with RGB stars looks fine. After all, we are in no way 'authentically' representing the 'real' colours. As soon as we go to NB we are producing some representation that highlights the features in the target we find of interest or aesthetically pleasing. I would argue that in most cases with BB or OSC we also deliberately distort the colour balance for the same purpose.

So the question for me is - do you find NB stars affect your viewing of the image? Does the fact that they are clearly not star coloured worry you? Do you like the representation that includes more natural star colours? In the end it is your creative choice.

I have occasionally done RGB stars for NB images, but rarely found it worth the effort - for me. However, I am playing with an image that combines HaO3 and S2O3 dualband filters from an OSC camera. In this image the star colours are disturbing (to me), and I haven't found a solution yet except to de-saturate the star layer. That image might(?) benefit from RGB stars.

[TakMan]

Anyhow, more importantly - good to see you back David ‘Skipper..’ and sorry to hear that your absence was due to illness - hope things are on the mend…

Agree with Ollie with regards to mixing stars from two very different pallets… HOO often benefits from the introduction of RGB stars - but that’s just my preference!

Much prefer the new version, perhaps a bit too sharpened..? You still have (but less) posterisation - but perhaps that is down to ‘micro’ sharpening….

Clear skies to you…

Damian

[ollypenrice]

50 minutes ago, Stuart1971 said:

Hmmm, I have had a few Atik CCD in my time and never seen that, I think @ollypenrice used to use an Atik 16200 too, just never noticed the spikes before, especially with a frac…but then maybe you re correct…👍🏻

No, I'm afraid I never had this one. I had 7 Atiks but never this chip or the 8300.

These artifacts don't bother me but if they do bother an imager they are a simple cosmetic fix in Ps.

Olly

[Stuart1971]

2 hours ago, TakMan said:

I wonder Stuart if you had an Atik with a Sony CCD sensor…? Different chip architecture/microlenses….

Probably it was some time ago…Although I did have the Starlight Xpress SXVR-H18 with the 8300 chip, mono version, and nave noticed these artefacts with that one…but again it was a while ago…👍🏻

[Skipper Billy]

4 hours ago, ollypenrice said:

Have you tried Russ Croman's Noise Xterminator? It is utterly astounding and miles ahead of any other NR routine I've tried. It probably came along while you were out of action and I think it would be ideal for this image.

I havent tried them but catching up in the various forums it seems that almost every man and his dog are using BlurX, NoiseX and StarX etc. I might investigate!

[Skipper Billy]

4 hours ago, Stuart1971 said:

can I ask how or why you have spikes in the stars with a tak 106… are the optics pinched slightly…?

I use an Atik 16200 and it has produced wee diffraction spikes on every scope I have tried it on.

I quite like the effect!!

[Skipper Billy]

3 hours ago, old_eyes said:

Welcome back. A nice image to start with.

I am not sure I agree with @ollypenrice. I think your two palette image with RGB stars looks fine. After all, we are in no way 'authentically' representing the 'real' colours. As soon as we go to NB we are producing some representation that highlights the features in the target we find of interest or aesthetically pleasing. I would argue that in most cases with BB or OSC we also deliberately distort the colour balance for the same purpose.

Thank you.

It was more of an experiment as I have time on my hands at the moment and I found it quite interesting.

I probably wont do it again. I agree with all you say about interpretation and artistic licence!

[Skipper Billy]

3 hours ago, TakMan said:

Anyhow, more importantly - good to see you back David ‘Skipper..’ and sorry to hear that your absence was due to illness - hope things are on the mend…

Thank you!

I am well on the mend thanks. 12 weeks ago I couldnt walk 200 meters. Today I have just got back from a 7 mile walk up Ben Cruachan with 1300 feet of ascent in a blizzard!!

[ollypenrice]

40 minutes ago, Skipper Billy said:

I havent tried them but catching up in the various forums it seems that almost every man and his dog are using BlurX, NoiseX and StarX etc. I might investigate!

My big thing is processing: Star X and Noise X have changed the game. Blur X is good provided your star shapes are decent to begin with. It's the least important of the three  but stretching an object without stretching the stars is bliss. Star X. You won't look back!

Olly

[Skipper Billy]

Just now, ollypenrice said:

My big thing is processing: Star X and Noise X have changed the game. Blur X is good provided your star shapes are decent to begin with. It's the least important of the three  but stretching an object without stretching the stars is bliss. Star X. You won't look back!

Better than Starnet2 ??