Go Back   IceInSpace > Images > Deep Space

Reply
 
Thread Tools Rate Thread
  #1  
Old 26-02-2021, 10:24 AM
TrevorW
Registered User

TrevorW is offline
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Western Australia
Posts: 7,852
Comments- Good or bad

I posted three images recently a lot of people looked but no comments, either way I would be happy with suggestions to improve or someone even offering processing workflows that may help, my skills have become rusty after an extended hiatus, any comment whether positive or negative is better than no comment at all as I want to improve what I do - I have access to PS Pc2,3,6, Affinity, Pixinsight LE, even IRIS for processing with DSS for stacking- thank you
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 26-02-2021, 11:03 AM
Peter Ward's Avatar
Peter Ward
Galaxy hitchhiking guide

Peter Ward is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: The Shire
Posts: 8,090
Quote:
Originally Posted by TrevorW View Post
I posted three images recently a lot of people looked but no comments, either way I would be happy with suggestions to improve or someone even offering processing workflows that may help, my skills have become rusty after an extended hiatus, any comment whether positive or negative is better than no comment at all as I want to improve what I do - I have access to PS Pc2,3,6, Affinity, Pixinsight LE, even IRIS for processing with DSS for stacking- thank you
From my own experience, frank and fearless comments often induce eye-rolls, hence PC influence is such that many people just don't comment unless they like what they see.

You might want to try posting in the beginners section if you are seeking help in processing.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 26-02-2021, 11:33 AM
rustigsmed's Avatar
rustigsmed (Russell)
Registered User

rustigsmed is offline
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Mornington Peninsula, Australia
Posts: 3,950
also people don't generally provide feedback as Peter mentioned unless specifically requested in the OP. I note your 3 posts didn't request assistance which is probably why there were no comments making suggestions.
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 26-02-2021, 11:56 AM
strongmanmike's Avatar
strongmanmike (Michael)
Highest Observatory in Oz

strongmanmike is offline
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Canberra
Posts: 17,152
Hi Trevor

The issue you have raised is a difficult and even kinda sensitive one really but hey I'll have a shot....

If someone posts an image of one of the most imaged, studied and viewed objects in the sky (Eta, M42, Running Chicken etc) for which there are literally 1000's of examples to compare to on the net and countless tutorials and forum responses etc to sift through that could provide help, and if your post has a scientific type informative description of this well known object and the physical processes going on etc ie it is an astro object specific informative post, rather than a "so, what do you think of what I have done here" post, few are likely to really want to be listing all of the things they think are wrong with it, from a processing/presentation view point, does that make sense?

I suggest when you post an image for aesthetic/processing feedback, especially of the obvious well known culprits, probably don't bother with the description of what it is and what it represents etc (we all know), rather, try asking more specific processing questions, say, you may have had trouble with one or two aspects of the image processing, maybe the star colour, or noise etc and ask for specific ideas on different approaches people might have that you could try. An open expectation for a full critique is unlikely to be rewarded.

Hope that all made sense

Mike
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 26-02-2021, 12:54 PM
gregbradley's Avatar
gregbradley
Registered User

gregbradley is offline
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Sydney
Posts: 17,877
I posted some suggestions on each of your posted images;

1. The Eta shot is not bad at all but it would have been a lot nicer with your QHy268C as the 183 pixels are too small for that RC scope. That will cause images to be soft and you will show up the weak seeing easier than larger pixelled cameras will

2. The Running Chicken - the repro made the stars look better but the oversharpening caused a worm effect.



Greg.
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 26-02-2021, 12:59 PM
TrevorW
Registered User

TrevorW is offline
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Western Australia
Posts: 7,852
Thanks all advice comments welcome, will take board for the future
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 26-02-2021, 01:12 PM
gregbradley's Avatar
gregbradley
Registered User

gregbradley is offline
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Sydney
Posts: 17,877
Quote:
Originally Posted by TrevorW View Post
Thanks all advice comments welcome, will take board for the future
Yep, that's how we learned around here.

Greg.
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 26-02-2021, 04:39 PM
alpal's Avatar
alpal
Registered User

alpal is offline
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 3,602
Hi Trevor,
I think other posters may be like me -
we know how difficult it is to set up a mount and telescope,
with camera and power supply and laptop outside -
and then spend all night outside taking pics - sub frames.
To post a picture of your results after all that hard work and then
have someone tear your picture to pieces can be heart breaking.
We've got a problem on the forum in that we have:
beginners, intermediate and advanced imagers.
I usually only comment on advanced imagers now
when I see a splendid result.
That way I'm not going to get myself into trouble with
the imager or the management of this website.

I was absolutely canned a few times for taking someone's pic
and making a slight adjustment to it and re-posting it.
The pics are copyright so -
yes I was at fault even though I was only trying to help
but it still annoyed me as at least I had put some real effort and time to help someone.
Also - it is really difficult to advise someone on their final pic result
when you don't access to their original FITS files.
Who knows if it was stretched properly -
I use NASA FITS Liberator for that but God knows what
some people have done.

Typical faults:
(1) I get annoyed by pics that are over smoothed so that all noise
is taken out of them.
I want to see the noise floor.

(2) Pics that are over sharpened so that worms start appearing.

(3) Pics that are in weird colours with no artistic merit.
Knowledge of LAB mode required to get the colours right.

(4) Pics that have enough good colour noise free areas that are not
boosted in colour and look bland and lifeless.
Knowledge of blurred layer masks required in Photoshop to boost only in areas of low noise.

(5) pics that need a contrast adjustment in high brightness areas
such as the center of galaxys or nebulas - once again with blurred layer masks.
Sometimes caused by poor stretching at the start of processing.

cheers
Allan
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 26-02-2021, 04:50 PM
TrevorW
Registered User

TrevorW is offline
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Western Australia
Posts: 7,852
Cheers Alan, I tend to agree with some of your points/issues
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 26-02-2021, 05:46 PM
multiweb's Avatar
multiweb (Marc)
ze frogginator

multiweb is offline
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Sydney
Posts: 22,060
Never really had any issues re-processing somebody's pic to better highlight something or have my pic reprocessed by somebody else as long as it's constructive. Sometime it's worse but other times it's actually better and you learn something in the process. You can't get too precious about what you post publicly. It is open for comments and/or critique. If you have a thin skin then it might be better to start a blog and grow your fanboy base. it's always a healthy discussion and a learning process for all.

Last edited by h0ughy; 27-02-2021 at 06:49 PM. Reason: Edited to be nice
Reply With Quote
  #11  
Old 26-02-2021, 06:08 PM
Alchemy (Clive)
Quietly watching

Alchemy is offline
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Yarra Junction
Posts: 3,044
Probably best for brutal and honest critique to be done privately.

But..... being as you are keen to improve

If you want to do quality imaging it takes hours and hours and hours of data, resist the temptation to post a picture after the first night. By all means process it, but more data equals smoother data, and hence you can get more out of it.

Darks, Flats, Bias, Dark flats, it takes very little effort to do them, you may think you’re data is good enough, well it can always be better. Particularly if you want to stretch your image.

If you want feedback on a constructive level, the beginners section probably provides the best possible chance, and ask for it ( as you’ve done here)

On a personal level, I don’t want to read something copied from Wikipedia on a common object, I’ve seen it dozens of times, unless there’s some new revelation that can be seen in the image. I know it’s common nowadays, but honestly it’s just done to try to give some credibility to the image, let the image speak for itself. Now if you image the unusual, the obscure, by all means educate us, but if you’re going after them, your skills need to be up to speed first.

It’s a bit hard to comment on a picture constructively without knowing a bit about the process, rather than try to give the Wikipedia blurb, tell us how you got the image.... number of frames, settings, how you stacked it, your workflow with the processing, that will give an opportunity for someone to give some pointers, and find out maybe where you fall down. Get a basic routine worked out, you’ve obviously got some programs, good equipment, the potential is there.

Buy a book or two on processing learn from others, Mastering Pixinsight and the art of astroimage processing has plenty of good tips, you can buy a PDF version for a few dollars. It will supply you with a workflow and ideas.

Data size, given I’m not interested in posting my images I don’t know how big images are these days, but mini jpgs compressed don’t help the viewing, get an Astro bin account or pbase or whatever most of the others use, it’s a bit hard to critique a tiny image.

Current trends are to oversaturate images ...... not a fan ....try getting annimage and just overdo the saturation ridiculously...detail disappears.... find a sweet spot, narrow band images are a different box and more open to interpretation.

Do you have a Ha filter, if so try getting say 5 hours of data on the running chicken nebula, and using it as your luminance channel with the color data you have, detail will jump of the plate in comparison.

Give your data to someone you know who can process reasonably well and see what they can do with it. The brightest objects such as ETA are fairly low level concerns as they are so bright a quick logarithmic stretch gives something nice to look at, but the fainter objects need much more time.

Well you asked... good or bad... I’m sure it’s one of those
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 26-02-2021, 06:16 PM
TrevorW
Registered User

TrevorW is offline
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Western Australia
Posts: 7,852
Thanks Clive food for thought
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 27-02-2021, 10:26 AM
Paul Haese's Avatar
Paul Haese
Registered User

Paul Haese is offline
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Adelaide
Posts: 9,937
These days I don't generally comment unless I see something which is a stand out. Many people don't comment too because of time constraints or they don't feel qualified.

With regard to image processing I look for the key stuff. Is the image black point clipped? Is the light being respected (as David Malin put it)? What does the colour balance look like? What sort of detail processing is going on in the image? Is that detail processing excessive or subtle? Do the stars have colour and is that colour correct (Hubble palette being the exception)? I hate green stars. I don't generally like fluro or garrish colour palettes (it's not a painting competition, its astronomy imaging).

Much of this cannot be done with broad brush processing. It must be done selectively in my opinion. And; all that comes with lots of practice and experimenting, learning the tools of processing. Ensuring you have a calibrated monitor also is essential. I often process several times during capture of data. Many of my projects last months, some now are going over years. You can never have too much data. I learnt that from Rolf Olsen.

A good way of learning processing techniques is to do online courses, look for tutorials and experiment with techniques you already know. Another way is to start discussions in relevant forums here. There are many ways to learn, not one is the only way.
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 27-02-2021, 12:50 PM
TrevorW
Registered User

TrevorW is offline
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Western Australia
Posts: 7,852
Thanks Paul
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 27-02-2021, 03:56 PM
Andy01's Avatar
Andy01 (Andy)
My God it's full of stars

Andy01 is offline
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 3,253
Hey Trevor, welcome to the ups & downs of the IIS imaging forums

Most of us who post in the Deep Space section started out posting in the beginners section, got great feedback, learned the craft, occasionally got beaten up a bit but eventually persevered until reaching some sort of level of quality where an advanced imager or fellow beginner eventually tells you to "get outa here, your images now belong in the deep space section!"

Happily, most folk here are courteous and respectful and generally encouraging of one another's images.

Personally I attempt to use the kiss/kick/kiss method of critique. ie: say something nice, then say what you really think and then finish with a positive comment. Everyone wins and no one is offended.

With regard to your images, as mentioned above, if posted in the Deep Space section & it's not a great image then people will generally 'let it through to the keeper' unless specifically asked.

You have some great advice in the comments above, ie: get significantly more data, use darks/flats/dark flats/bias etc. work on your processing, watch youtube tutorials from Adam Block & others and don't be afraid to ask for help on specific issues, as there is so much combined experience here to draw on.

Let's face it, this hobby is hard, if it was easy everyone would do it - so give it time, most of us needed years to develop our skillset and we never stop learning! Keep at it & clear skies

Last edited by h0ughy; 27-02-2021 at 06:54 PM. Reason: Removing some content unbecoming
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old 27-02-2021, 05:47 PM
Nikolas's Avatar
Nikolas (Nik)
Dazed and confused

Nikolas is offline
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 3,253
Listen to Andy, I have learned a lot from Andy and appreciate all his feedback.
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 27-02-2021, 06:52 PM
Andy01's Avatar
Andy01 (Andy)
My God it's full of stars

Andy01 is offline
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 3,253
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nikolas View Post
Listen to Andy, I have learned a lot from Andy and appreciate all his feedback.
Thanks Nik, appreciate the positive feedback, glad it’s working for you
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT +10. The time is now 08:38 AM.

Powered by vBulletin Version 3.8.7 | Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Advertisement
Bintel
Advertisement
Testar
Advertisement