It was more that sharp dark ‘pillar’ and the other ‘features’ in the 127mm image (the first one) surrounded by the smoothed out background that suggests some kind of selective AI texturing to me. The noise profile of the CDK image (the second one) seems more natural and doesn’t feel like sharpening is interpolating additional detail. In all images I’ve seen the ‘pillar’ or dark bump is never defined in regard to a sharp edge let alone that jagged top with the bright linear features next to it. Again at a lower resolution the 127mm pillar is a sharp ‘something’ but close up it looks like a jagged tower rising through the mist against a blood red sky. And perhaps that’s the dilemma here - what I think is oversharpened and interpolated detail could be more dramatically suggestive, even if it isn’t the actual product of a star going supernova (which at a micro level on a very faint object could be quite regular and not very suggestive of anything). Not sure there is a Hubble version of this object to check against which is why I thought a deep CDK14 version might suffice, although as you point out Greg, these bigger scopes do have their issues. Anyway, enough from me. Thinking about it too much when I should be trying to solve my own issues!
Clear skies!