Centaurus A 120 hours, Take Two

[SkyViking]

Hi All,

Having spent much of the past year exploring new image processing tools and refining skills in that area I felt it was time to do a repro of my 120 hour Centaurus A image (http://www.iceinspace.com.au/forum/showthread.php?t=107812). I'm still happy with the original version, but... one cannot sit on such a pile of data without making the most of it :P

Below is a link to the full resolution new version of the image. I think it's a big improvement over the original - it's even hard to see it is the same data!
This time I was able to bring out the concentric shells much more and at the same time give the image a more subtle natural look. One might even say this version respects the light :lol:

I started from scratch and did a complete re-registration and combine of the data again, followed by about two weeks of nightly tinkering in PixInsight. The new version also has slightly higher resolution than the old one, despite it looking more relaxed and less 'processed'.

Link to full resolution image (3.5MB) (http://www.rolfolsenastrophotography.com/Astrophotography/Centaurus-A-Extreme-Deep-Field/i-6RGLbJp/O)

All details about the image acquisition and what is visible are still the same as in the original thread (http://www.iceinspace.com.au/forum/showthread.php?t=107812).

Hope you enjoy this new take on the extreme deep field. All comments and critique welcome as always.

Regards,
Rolf

[cometcatcher]

The repo is better I think. You can see the "pond wave" effect more betterer. :)

And jeez, 120 hours....

[Peter.M]

Hmm, its certainly a tamer version. I notice that the background is a little smoother in the new version which I like, but I sort of enjoy the mottled look of the old one. One thing I think would be great for the new version is some work on the red layer to reduce the star halos. They are present on brighter stars in both the blue and red layers but for some reason I think the red ones annoy me the most.


Still a great image no matter how you present it Rolf! :thumbsup:

[Peter Ward]

A gold standard by which many will be found wanting :thumbsup::thumbsup:

[strongmanmike]

Cool stuff Rolf, the shells are more obvious now and it looks softer but whether it is a better version...I dunno, it's different sure but better..? One thing that is for sure though is it's certainly a fabulous image of (about half of :whistle:) Centaurus A ;) ...This is still the Full Monty (http://www.rolfolsenastrophotography.com/Astrophotography/Centaurus-A-Extreme-Deep-Field/i-hFknr4n/X3) :thumbsup:...hmmm?..have you tried blending the two..?

Mike

[gregbradley]

I like both. I like the more muted galaxy of the new but prefer the stars in the original.

I think overall I prefer the original as its more in your face and shows the massive extent of this super galaxy.

You've done a great job on both. Its weird in a way they can be presented so well so differently.

Greg.

[astronobob]

Extraordinary Images :eyepop: :cool:

[RickS]

Great repro, Rolf! Like many other posters I like aspects of both versions.

Cheers,
Rick.

[Geoff45]

Both great versions Rolf. With so much data you probably can't display all aspects of it with just one processing version.
Geoff

[multiweb]

Awesome stuff Rolf. Are you going to shoot that one with the new scope as well?

[Stevec35]

Exceptionally nice Rolf! I think this treatment of the data is definitely better.

Cheers

Steve

[alpal]

I agree that a blend between the two would be interesting & maybe better.

[Bart]

I like the original better, although the new version is still good.

[Octane]

I love both renditions. So much flexibility in interpretation when you have so much accrued data to play with. Still a benchmark image to aspire to. :)

H

[David Fitz-Henr]

Both nice versions Rolf; I think the processing of the dust lanes is better in the new version and some of the background galaxies stand out better
but the original shows some fainter stars and detail ... so both have something to offer :thumbsup:

[SkyViking]

Thanks for your comments everyone. Maybe I need to make a 3rd version :lol:. Personally I favour the new version as I think it has a less processed look, while still showing all the details of the original. But yeah, you need to know they are there before you'll see them, that's probably the difference.
There are some coloured halos around the brighter stars in the new version and this is because I used the RGB from the original version as the colour layer in the new. Since I significantly reduced the star halos in luminance they no longer fit exactly with the old RGB (although I did tweak the RGB a bit).
Maybe I need to start from scratch with the RGB data as well - oh well, I've done some 100 hours of processing on this data now, and still counting... :eyepop::lol:



Hi Marc, I think I'll pass for now, I have a list of other targets I would like to try. After all there isn't really much more to show on this galaxy I think. But maybe in the future, when the Cen A fever hits me again ;)

[atalas]

Stunning before and still stunning Rolf...I couldn't choose which version I like best.

[dvj]

Lovely. Not so overblown as the original. But both are extraordinary images.

[LightningNZ]

My poster is worthless now...:sadeyes:

;) Just kidding. Very nicely done.

-Cam

[jenchris]

Awe..

[Kunama]

You clearly have too much time on your hands Rolf ........... just stunning !!!
:eyepop::eyepop::eyepop::eyepop:

[marco]

Cannot say if it is better than last version or not, sure it is one of the most amazing amateur images I have ever seen..

Clear skies
Marco

[andyc]

120 hours? Needs more data ;)




Absolutely magnificent image! And immense dedication to get that much data. I can't actually say which version I prefer though.

[SkyViking]

Thanks very much Louie, yeah there are pros and cons of both versions. :)


Thank you John. That's sort of what I felt when looking back, that the original was pushed a bit too much. But the point was to show everything that was there, so it's rather difficult to strike the right balance. Great fun to play with this data though!


Cheers Cameron, I may have to issue a new edition of the poster (http://www.rolfolsenastrophotography.com/Astrophotography/Centaurus-A-Extreme-Deep-Field/i-RmJJDw3):P


Thank you Jen :)


Thanks Matt, not having enough time is what is usually feels like, but yes I did spend a rather long time on this project. Think I'll put it on the shelf for now and take a rest. :lol:


Thanks a lot Marco, I'm glad you enjoyed it. It's a special galaxy so deserves special treatment :D



Thank you Andy :) Not sure if I'll go though such a marathon again, but it sure was a great experience.
And, one can never have too much data! :thumbsup:

[Camknox]

Oh. My. God.

[Nicola]

Excellent image! Well done!

[SkyViking]

Thanks very much Cameron! :)


Thank you Nicola :)

[strongmanmike]

Just had another look at this Rolf (still trying to avoid loking at images of Cen A these days...somehwat Cen A'd out, shall we say :scared2: :lol:) but...it is eeexcellent Smithers...eeeexcellent :evil:

Mike

[SkyViking]

Thanks very much Mike, lol :) It is such a great galaxy, I'm sure we'll both return to this object some day.
Btw do you still prefer the original version?

[strongmanmike]

Yeah I dunno, together we have revealed about all there is in this galaxy for amateurs at visible wavelengths :shrug: soooo I have no desire really and I am sure you won't be collecting Cen A light for at least century or so :lol: buut never say never I guess..actually I did do a test image of Cen A on first light night with the AG12 back in 2011...it was crap, the seeing in Newcastle was atrocious :doh:...hmmm even though the FOV is much smaller and would essentially only fit in the hamburger the current setup should give higher resolution than I managed with the Starfire, sooo if the seeing cooprates hmmm?..ah see? there ya go! never say never :lol:

As to my favourite version of yours?...well they are both excellent of course but I think the first version more seemlessly blended with my effort...but perhaps we give it a try :D

Mike