SHO Heart nebula, am I taking it too far?

[assouptro]

I have a question regarding this image 

I have always been a fan of understated quality images, ones that don’t make your eyes hurt with saturation and contrast, however, the internet seems to prefer these?

I have been imaging for 20+ years now, I am a slow learner, tend to stick with what I know for a long time before trying something radically different

Recently though, I have adopted Nina and automated things like plate solving, autofocus and filter changes party down to the help and information freely available from sites like this and it has been a revelation! So, I just wanted to say thank you to all the helpful stargazers out there that contribute to the community! 
 

now I can achieve a dataset of all filters in a session, I can even switch targets whilst I sleep! 
 

As a result of this, I have acquired more useable data and I have been delving deeper into the amazing features available in Pixinsight (although I haven’t even scratched the surface) 

Anyway, I’m completely off topic now, What I really wanted was some advice.

Am I going too far with images like this? 
is it over processed? Too much colour? Should I tone it down and be a bit more subtle? 
 

I value your opinions and I don’t want to get cornered into a workflow that is detrimental to the original data

Is the purple in there a mistake? 

This is around 15 hours HSO with a bit of RGB for the small amount of stars I’ve left in 

Thanks for looking and please don’t hold back if it offends your eyes, let me know 

Thanks 

Bryan 😊

[michael.h.f.wilkinson]

It is a spectacular image, and although i also tend to prefer more natural looks, I would not call this overcooked. The amount of contrast and saturation preferred is ultimately a matter of taste, so what counts is what you like.

[Stuart1971]

I tend to agree with you and am also a bit slow to learn and change with the times, I also like understated  images too and not much for heavily processed and over saturated colours, I like to see the more natural look, if there is such a think for images like these.

As for your image it’s very nice, and the golds are just about right, the blues IMHO are a tad over saturated for my liking…but I think you have left just the right amount of green in the image, as many seem to remove most of this…

Its a stunning image..👏🏻👏🏻

[assouptro]

58 minutes ago, michael.h.f.wilkinson said:

It is a spectacular image, and although i also tend to prefer more natural looks, I would not call this overcooked. The amount of contrast and saturation preferred is ultimately a matter of taste, so what counts is what you like.

Thank you for the input 

I understand, it really does come down to personal taste 😊

[assouptro]

58 minutes ago, Stuart1971 said:

I tend to agree with you and am also a bit slow to learn and change with the times, I also like understated  images too and not much for heavily processed and over saturated colours, I like to see the more natural look, if there is such a think for images like these.

As for your image it’s very nice, and the golds are just about right, the blues IMHO are a tad over saturated for my liking…but I think you have left just the right amount of green in the image, as many seem to remove most of this…

Its a stunning image..👏🏻👏🏻

That’s a really useful comment Stuart 

I appreciate you taking the time to comment 

I may reprocess this one and tone the blues down a bit to see what I get 

Thanks again 

Bryan 😊

[geeklee]

1 hour ago, assouptro said:

I value your opinions and I don’t want to get cornered into a workflow that is detrimental to the original data

Is the purple in there a mistake? 

Agree with the observations so far.  It is quite saturated and at full size (only) you can see that more within the noise, but it looks good.  I'm a fan of a bit of colour especially the variations and transitions that a narrowband image can offer. While I wouldn't have pushed my own this far on saturation, it doesn't stop me enjoying yours!  Perhaps you've done what I always want to do with the colour... 🤣

I'm not sure about the purple though.  If I hadn't got rid of that quite early I would take a step back and wonder where it's coming from - perhaps some left over gradient in one channel, or some general background issue.  Perhaps some masks could be used to balance this part of the background out if you can't step back.

Great job.

[assouptro]

5 minutes ago, geeklee said:

Agree with the observations so far.  It is quite saturated and at full size (only) you can see that more within the noise, but it looks good.  I'm a fan of a bit of colour especially the variations and transitions that a narrowband image can offer. While I wouldn't have pushed my own this far on saturation, it doesn't stop me enjoying yours!  Perhaps you've done what I always want to do with the colour... 🤣

I'm not sure about the purple though.  If I hadn't got rid of that quite early I would take a step back and wonder where it's coming from - perhaps some left over gradient in one channel, or some general background issue.  Perhaps some masks could be used to balance this part of the background out if you can't step back.

Great job.

Thank you for your comment and your advice

This is probably the most saturated image I have produced to date.

 

This is probably the most saturated image I have produced to date.

I got carried away with the selective colour script And the purple is, in fact, Green nebulosity that I chose to turn up the red and blue on!

Green nebulosity that I chose to turn up the red and blue on!

I appear to have a bit of an issue with my laptop screen and I’m finding it difficult to get the right luminosity and colour balance without saving it, uploading to OneDrive then viewing on my much smaller but better corrected phone screen 🙄

I think l’ll have a few steps back (I’ve saved the project) and reassess 

Thanks again 

Bryan 😊

[geeklee]

16 minutes ago, assouptro said:

I got carried away with the selective colour script And the purple is, in fact, Green nebulosity that I chose to turn up the red and blue on!

Ah, if it was a choice, then apologies - if you like it then that's all that matters 😊

17 minutes ago, assouptro said:

I appear to have a bit of an issue with my laptop screen and I’m finding it difficult to get the right luminosity and colour balance without saving it, uploading to OneDrive then viewing on my much smaller but better corrected phone screen 🙄

I know what you mean, I often check an image on another device (or 2) just to be sure.  If you're not using it already, I find the simple "Readout mode" tool in PixInsight useful - gives you a zoomed view of a certain area and RGB readouts (and other readout types) so you can see particular values.  I can provide a few screenshots if that would help.

[ONIKKINEN]

This is an excellent image, to my eyes at least.

Saturation and colour seems to be in a good place, i really like the vibrant blues you have here. But more importantly i think saturation and colour especially with narrowband is a matter of taste and opinions will differ on that between different people. Cant please everyone, so try to please yourself when processing and work with that.

[Sp@ce_d]

I like it, probably wouldn't push the saturation any further but this is the kind of representation I'd go for if I wanted to hang a print on the wall. Personally I like to see more of the darker thinner structures standing out against the billowing clouds of colour and probably why I almost always end up over sharpening 😄. False colour NB is just that anyway and open to our own interpretation for non scientific representation, we all have different tastes. It's funny how times and tastes change.. Not that long ago it was all salmon pink. I don't think green had been at all permissible until Hanny discovered her Voorwerp had it?  🤣

[Roy Foreman]

Unlike most DSO imagers I'm not a great fan of false colour NB images, which just goes to show how tastes vary. However, there are some NB images that I find appealing and yours is one of them. I like it just the way it is.

[CCD Imager]

Saturation is definitely a personal choice, just make sure it is not clipped. As you have been imaging a long time, you will know that exposures of objects has increased dramatically among amateurs and in those early days, images tended to look noisy when saturation increased. But with longer exposures and now excellent anti-noise software, this can be largely avoided.

In photography, proper saturation is crucial.

Let me ask you which image below you prefer?

[assouptro]

8 minutes ago, CCD Imager said:

Saturation is definitely a personal choice, just make sure it is not clipped. As you have been imaging a long time, you will know that exposures of objects has increased dramatically among amateurs and in those early days, images tended to look noisy when saturation increased. But with longer exposures and now excellent anti-noise software, this can be largely avoided.

In photography, proper saturation is crucial.

Let me ask you which image below you prefer?

Thanks for the comment 

I  understand what you are saying, and it makes perfect sense when you lay it out like that 
 

Definitely the top one for me! 😊

Thanks again 

Bryan 

[Clarkey]

12 minutes ago, CCD Imager said:

Let me ask you which image below you prefer?

Either are good for me. Clean car that is not falling to bits - what's not to like😄

@assouptro But seriously, as everyone has said, it is personal choice. As long as you like it, then it does not matter. I suspect none of us are ever 100% happy with an image - I'm certainly not. But as long as to your eyes it is as good as you can get, then be happy.

FWIW it is probably a touch overdone for my tastes, but it is still a great image.

[assouptro]

39 minutes ago, Clarkey said:

Either are good for me. Clean car that is not falling to bits - what's not to like😄

@assouptro But seriously, as everyone has said, it is personal choice. As long as you like it, then it does not matter. I suspect none of us are ever 100% happy with an image - I'm certainly not. But as long as to your eyes it is as good as you can get, then be happy.

FWIW it is probably a touch overdone for my tastes, but it is still a great image.

Thanks for the comment 

As I have been looking at it more and more, I am inclined to agree

I think I need to walk away from an image, and give my eyes a break before committing to a final version 

It’s so tempting to post an image you have been looking at and incrementally adjusting for hours at the point it just feels “finished” but this hobby has always been about patience. 
I am definitely going to come back to this one, rewind a bit and try some slightly different approaches to see what I can do, The data is good, and I have all the time the gods and my family allow! 
Thanks for the input 

Bryan 😊

[assouptro]

3 hours ago, Roy Foreman said:

Unlike most DSO imagers I'm not a great fan of false colour NB images, which just goes to show how tastes vary. However, there are some NB images that I find appealing and yours is one of them. I like it just the way it is.

Thanks 

That is really kind of you! 
I am thinking it’s a bit too saturated the more I look at it 

It has initial impact, which is great, but the more I look, the more I question my choices! 
 

Thank you for your input and compliment 😊

Bryan 

[Laurin Dave]

I like it, the purples around the bright stars just come from the fact that the Oiii (Blue) and Sii (Red) are stretched much harder than the Ha... simple to remove ... invert the image  then run scnr... re-invert and its gone... it goes everywhere though so best to mask the areas where you want it to remain.  Also I'd suggest it would benefit from some colour noise reduction using ACDNR and also if you have it Noise Exterminator to reduce general noise,

Dave

[assouptro]

3 hours ago, Laurin Dave said:

I like it, the purples around the bright stars just come from the fact that the Oiii (Blue) and Sii (Red) are stretched much harder than the Ha... simple to remove ... invert the image  then run scnr... re-invert and its gone... it goes everywhere though so best to mask the areas where you want it to remain.  Also I'd suggest it would benefit from some colour noise reduction using ACDNR and also if you have it Noise Exterminator to reduce general noise,

Dave

Hi Dave 

really useful tips there! And thank you for the pm 

I am grateful for your input and help, I am going to play with your suggestions when I get back to my laptop!
 

this learning curve never shallows!! 🤩

all the Best 

Bryan 

[cfinn]

The purples are real and represent where there is an over-abundance of OIII emission. I have the same as you in exactly the same place bottom right in the fish head nebula. If you’ve done the same as me using ColourCalibration in PixInsight and using the whole nebula as a white balance, this will be a natural consequence of that. These colours are nice as they are both visually appealing AND they tell you something interesting about the physics and the composition of the gases we are looking at.

[cfinn]

I also like your image by the way. It looks great!

[assouptro]

3 hours ago, cfinn said:

I also like your image by the way. It looks great!

Thank you ☺️ 

I appreciate your input on the purple, makes me feel more settled in my choices 

I did Calibra earlier in the workflow but the purple areas were still quite green so I adjusted them by eye and preferred the purple as it helped  differentiate the gasses involved 

your version is beautiful! 😍 

Thanks again 

Bryan 

[geeklee]

11 hours ago, cfinn said:

The purples are real and represent where there is an over-abundance of OIII emission.

Would it need some strong SII signal (R channel) in there to create the purple? As OP mentions, he found his more green and selectively altered it rather than got it naturally.

As you say, that area near the fish head has strong OIII.  I typically see very blue/cyan renditions showing this, but have seen the occasional purple too, so my interest is piqued!

My comments on the purple were the top and bottom of the image where it seemed like elements of the background were affected although another poster mentioned it was around a small number of stars. 

Edited January 27 by geeklee

[cfinn]

27 minutes ago, geeklee said:

Would it need some strong SII signal (R channel) in there to create the purple? As OP mentions, he found his more green and selectively altered it rather than got it naturally.

As you say, that area near the fish head has strong OIII.  I typically see very blue/cyan renditions showing this, but have seen the occasional purple too, so my interest is piqued!

My comments on the purple were the top and bottom of the image where it seemed like elements of the background were affected although another poster mentioned it was around a small number of stars. 

Yes, you’re right, some SII is needed in there as well to make the purple colour, otherwise it would just come through as blue. I did nothing to my image to make that happen, just the colour calibration using the entire nebula as a white reference. I’ll need to have another look at the SII and OIII masters now to check!

[geeklee]

45 minutes ago, cfinn said:

I’ll need to have another look at the SII and OIII masters now to check!

I have some recent short focal length data.  I've quickly cropped and combined + calibrated in PI.  I can see the bigger variations you're talking about in the cyan Vs strong blue with hint of purple.  This is with no green removed and then some green removed.  Thanks for mentioning this - a new appreciation for the differences here.  

 

EDIT: The lower left here is very strong in SII (HB3 (SNR G132.6+01.5))

Edited January 27 by geeklee

[cfinn]

14 minutes ago, geeklee said:

I have some recent short focal length data.  I've quickly cropped and combined in PI.  I can see the bigger variations you're talking about in the cyan Vs strong blue with hint of purple.  This is with no green removed and then some green removed.  Thanks for mentioning this - a new appreciation for the differences here.

 

Very nice! I had another go using just a bottom right crop and colour calibrating the starless image with just that portion of the nebula. I get a different result, quite similar to yours, which demonstrates that this will be sensitive to the choice of reference point for the white balance. It's a stronger purple in my original image above since I used the entire heart nebula as the reference point, which exaggerates the fact that OIII is so strong in the fish head compared to everywhere else and there is just a trace of SII which leads to the purple colour. As can be seen from the chromaticity diagram below, only a trace of red is needed to generate something verging on purple.