Fantastic image Lars - especially for a relatively short total exposure time. Looks like the FR is doing the business! Very subtle. I really have to get a copy of CCDstack.
You might get more people looking if you stick this in the Deep Space photography section though!
nice work, plenty and i mean plenty of nice detail.
i would bump up the red/magenta saturation a bit though, and even though i know there is no up or down in space, i like to see the pillars rising so a CCW rotation of at least 90 deg for me.
Funny you should say that - I did rotate the image and it aint bad. I think the image is actually better before deconvolution than after - less processing artifacts. I'll try to do better in the next 24 hours
Cheers and thanks
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alchemy
nice work, plenty and i mean plenty of nice detail.
i would bump up the red/magenta saturation a bit though, and even though i know there is no up or down in space, i like to see the pillars rising so a CCW rotation of at least 90 deg for me.
Grim is right, I've really not spent any time on it other than the combine and deconvolve. But I will do better - I promise. Anyone who is interested, I can send them the original stacked images (on CD or DVD - the images are 27MB each) I'd love to see what people can come up with
A sort of a challenge I guess. but certainly one I could learn from and perhaps others as well? The only caveat is that anyone doing it would have to "divulge" how they did it
Any one interested (I know Bert, you are - I'll have a disk off to you soon)
Cheers
Lars
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bassnut
Yes, nice detail there, and sorry to be brutal, but given the gear, the processing is pretty grim generally.
Well, actually, Id be interested, its the the defining challenge to get a top result from top gear with minimum exposure time (code for expense) on rented gear .
Hmm... my attempt, and a quickie at that, but would be great to have original data
EDIT: And the second iteration here now as well. I spent quite a bit of time doing a pixel-level 50% strength blur at 500% zoom with a 9px fuzzy brush. I masked the stars first so they'd keep tighter focus and dodged around those that weren't masked. Looks better I think.
Flick between them and the difference is pretty apparent.
Give me your postal address (via PM) and I'll send you the original data.
Actually Chris I should have yours somewhere
There is always something new that we can learn. I for one would be grateful to see how far these exposures can be pushed
Regards
Lars
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bassnut
Well, actually, Id be interested, its the the defining challenge to get a top result from top gear with minimum exposure time (code for expense) on rented gear .
LOL! It's a bit bright Fred, but I want to push the colour in this one. Lars has captured it very nicely, and although the pillars are oriented in a different direction to the norm I think it looks different for it.
Yeah - there's a lot of new artefacting going on, it's no good doing it to a 72dpi JPG. Lars - can I download from you directly? I'd love to have a crack at the raw data if I may
I wish I could let you do the download, but I still dont have a website (despite your generous offer). I'm happy to slap it on a disk and send it to you at my expense. I'd love to see what you folks can come up with. Do you want the raw frames - or do you want the stacked frames?
There is an awful lot of data
Quote:
Originally Posted by Omaroo
LOL! It's a bit bright Fred, but I want to push the colour in this one. Lars has captured it very nicely, and although the pillars are oriented in a different direction to the norm I think it looks different for it.
Yeah - there's a lot of new artefacting going on, it's no good doing it to a 72dpi JPG. Lars - can I download from you directly? I'd love to have a crack at the raw data if I may
Uhmm... I was going to see what happened if I stayed entirely within Photoshop for it Lars, so is it possible to stick both RAW and stacked data on the same disk? I'd like to manually stack them as well, just for fun.
Here is M20, faults and all. The de-blooming algorithms in CCD stack are not so good (IMHO). So there is a bucket load of de-blooming artifacts in this image. It comprises
10 hours LHaRGB as follows:
Blue 24 * 5 mins unbinned @ -20c
Luminance 24 * 5 mins unbinned @ -20c
Ha 24 * 5 mins unbinned @ -20c
Green 36 * 5 mins unbinned @ -20c
Red 12 * 5 mins unbinned @ -20c
All other details as per the M16 image (no deconvolve). De-blooming represents my biggest challenge. Anything more than 5 mins exposure creates significant blooms and they can be challenging to remove
I've done NO processing other than calibration and stacking. Am running out of time
I saw how you stacked in PS and would be interested to see the results. CCDstack is very powerful but it does have a few limits with a 32 bit O/S.
Do you want M20 as well?
Cheers
Lars
Quote:
Originally Posted by Omaroo
Oh! Cool Lars!
Uhmm... I was going to see what happened if I stayed entirely within Photoshop for it Lars, so is it possible to stick both RAW and stacked data on the same disk? I'd like to manually stack them as well, just for fun.
You know its not the size of your rig but how you use it. I've finally got the RCOS to sing (blooded I believe was the term Guy used). Now I have to get really proficient at using the tooling (about 6 packages). I recon a couple of years from now and I should have it about right - based on how long it took me to get the RCOS going.