Another 2070 in Ha :)

[Star Catcher]

Yep another post of this southern favourite. Took this test image the other night to check operation after some maintenance on my camera.

Taken through GSO RC10 using 7nm Ha filter. 4 X 45mins each, STL6303E.

Ted

[RickS]

Looks like you got some nice detail there, Ted.

[Peter Ward]

Great result Ted. :thumbsup:

[Regulus]

Nicely dramatic too!

[Placidus]

Both deep and sharp. Perhaps the dynamic range is over-compressed: there is room for the spider itself to be quite a bit brighter without burning out.

Very well done.
Best,
MnT

[Star Catcher]

Thanks Rick, turned out better than I expected



Thanks Peter



Thank you



Thanks Mike, yes I did wrestle with where the brightest levels should sit. perhaps a tad more punch, but not too much :)

[strongmanmike]

Well check that out Ted ...part of me kinda goes wow :eyepop:and part of me goes yikes :scared: what the hell has he done there :lol:. I have seen this processing look in your previous images, what software/filter/process is at play here? I am thinking something in PI :question:

Mike

[Star Catcher]

Hi Mike. I have never come to grips with PI despite revisiting the software over the years. I still use Photoshop 3 for my main processing with Maxim for initial pre-processing/flattening etc.. Sometimes I'll run the image through deconvolution in Astraimage.

I rely heavily on layers to isolate areas of filter effect, I make use of plug-ins from carboni tools and a variety of Topaz filters/modules for sharpening/focus, Denoise/Dejpeg, dynamic range redistribution using the clarity modules. I don't usually follow the exact workflow as it really depends on how much S/N I have in the image and how well I can achieve isolation of stars, nebula and dark backgrounds. I still use the smart sharpening in PS for different scale structures.

So I'm a bit of a dinosaur in the processing space and my inconsistent workflow means that if I were to process the same image today from scratch, it may look substantially worse or better! :shrug: :)

[strongmanmike]

Sounds like how I process too :D and hey, I still use circa 2007 PS CS3+ :P

Aaah Topaz isn't that just deconvolution...? So all that might explain the heavily processed/sharpened look perhaps :question: still, it looks quite striking :thumbsup:

Mike

[Paul Haese]

You and Peter have using this technique for a while. Quite sharp detailing. Maybe a little more than is my preference but the impact is certainly there. Are you doing a NB version or colour? It should be high impact.

[Peter Ward]

Actually, I’ve been using PixInsight more often than not of late ;)

[gregbradley]

I agree with Mike and Paul. More sharpening than we would like but you certainly got lots of detail. Overall though the effect gives the feeling of the image being overprocessed.

Its a processing choice and it depends on how you want to present an object. All valid.

The advantage perhaps of the detail would be when you do the combine where you typically lose a lot of that detail and it may make up for that.

Greg.

[Star Catcher]

Thanks Paul. Yes I'll get around to redoing this Ha and other narrow bands. Easy to ease the pedal on the micro contrasting but I am always going to tend more towards harder edges rather than fluffy. :)

Ted

[Star Catcher]

Thanks Greg. It was processed as a standalone image without the intention to combine with other bands. The 16 bit tiff version does not quite come out as edgy as compared to this compressed version. When I attempt an SHO version I suspect the processing emphasis will change.
Ted