Quote:
Originally Posted by cfranks
I'd appreciate a look, Rick. I can never get my stars with a solid colour like yours. They usually have only a colour halo.
Thanks
Charles
|
Charles: blurring the chrominance as described in my quickie workflow can help a lot with this. Sometimes targeted use of ColorSaturation can reduce the halos too.
Quote:
Originally Posted by pvelez
2. The stars are not nearly as crisp as I’d like – the outer halos tend to get smudgy. I do see however that this is apparent in the other images as well.
5. I’d love to know how to isolate the smaller stars. Giving a saturation boost to the larger stars leads to many deep yellow/red stars in the background. Is there a funky way to mask all but the largest stars?
One thing that I was keen to see – whether I am being skimpy with my imaging. On a galaxy I am for about 6 hours of Lum and 4 hours each of RGB – all unbinned. Looking at what R & R could pull out of these data, I suspect I need to spend more time on the imaging – or look at larger targets.
|
Sounds like you used a few of my tricks already, Pete
I've been deliberately making my stars less crunchy since they are supposed to be soft and Gaussian. If you like them harder then a star mask and some sharpening will do it.
Dropping the scale in StarMask should get rid of the big ones.
4 hours each of RGB should be adequate. I'd go heavier on the Lum for most galaxies. 300 secs is really too short for your subs with that combination of scope and sensor. My set up is quite similar and I usually do 15 minutes on Lum and 20 minutes on RGB. If in doubt use the Shiraz method to make sure your subs are sky limited:
http://www.iceinspace.com.au/forum/s...d.php?t=117010
If you are sky limited then there's no extra value in binning, especially on a KAF-16803.
Another area where you might be able to get some good SNR gains is with integration. If you're not doing it already, careful selection of rejection algorithm and rejection parameters can make a big difference.
Cheers,
Rick.