eta comparison

[blink138]

hmmm something raymo mentioned yesterday about losing detail in the subject when there are too many stars is very interesting
the last two images i have taken happen to be on the same subject
one from very polluted backyard and the other 45 mins out from the city

same camera, same lens lps p2 for the garden
pat

[raymo]

I think I prefer the light polluted version. The other one is too harsh and
glaring, and in your face, for my taste. You don't seem to have lost much detail in the neb. I am looking at re-doing my widefields with shorter subs.
Perhaps you will see what others think.
raymo

[blink138]

i think i agree to a certain extent raymo!
pat

[LightningNZ]

I think with the one that's take outside of the city it's either too long an exposure, or too high ISO (or both). It seems to be white-clipped (highlights burnt out) and to have low dynamic range. That's probably why Raymo's describing it as looking glaring.

[blink138]

the histogram said it was correct cam............. processing is a different thing obviously but i always start them the same and there would be no way of me getting the other result from my back yard
pat