Quote:
Originally Posted by Peter Ward
In effect you are saying on one hand processing is everything, yet are having an each way bet by also saying: you can't make a silk purse out of a sows ear.
Jase, I think this is where our respective outlooks differ. I am not saying you are right and I am wrong, but simply that I personally put stock into getting great data far more than I do post processing....as IMHO you can't create detail that isn't there in the first place. i.e. I believe data is king.
To illustrate my perspective, I downloaded some freely available .fits data and did my own version of the Helix. In the space of twenty or so minutes got the following result
http://www.atscope.com.au/BRO/images/pn/hubhexpjw.jpg
Is this any less valid than my putting my name to 24" RC data someone else acquired for me? While the end result is not too shabby....I certainly don't believe this particular result is something I can take much credit for. |
What’s the point of having good data if you don’t have the expertise to maximise it. Personally, it’s a given that you need quality data if you want a “killer” image, however you can significantly improve mediocre data through processing. More and more mediocre data doesn’t equate to a great image without processing. Of course, there is a limit beyond repair. I’ve seen some disappointing images from RC’s due to processing. Even, some taken myself as I lacked experience. The point being is that quality data doesn’t equate to a quality finished product. The same can be said for processing. When entering the high-end equipment stakes, you are paying for the quality data be it in purchasing equipment outright or buying online time. It is then up to the imager to do the work. This is where it matters, hence my stance is unchanged.
I find your extreme example amusing. No differences in your opinion eh?
So in your presented image,
Did you have any say in how the data was acquired?
Did you have a choice to bin the data?
Could you alter the instrument rotator to change how you wanted the target to be framed?
How about filter selections?
Do you actually know what the composition of the image is, LLRGB, HaR+LRGB?
Did I hear "NO" to all of the above questions?...shame.
“Freely Available” – did you check the copyright information on the data you’ve downloaded…”Free” can come with conditions. You’d better quickly check before authorities come hunt you down. When you ACQUIRE (not simply download) data on rental scopes – YOU OWN that data in it’s entirety and can use it as you please. I should add that there is no requirement to credit where it came from, but I choose to do so.
No differences eh? You sure about that?