Quick Eta Repro

[bluescope]

Hi All

Messed around with image from last post and want some opinions ?

1st image is origainal post for comparison.

2nd image is that shot adjusted.

3rd image is different version all together.

Which do you prefer 2nd or 3rd .............. ?

:thumbsup:

[leon]

The third Steve, plenty of detail, but the colour seems a little on the purple side, however nice image.

Leon

[RobF]

Another vote for 3 here.....

[AlexN]

Yep... 3rd has much more contrast and detail apparent. I agree with leon, theres a bit much purple in it, but nothing a little fiddle in ps cant sort out for you...

Good work indeed..

[Garyh]

No:3 here as well :thumbsup: .. 2 is ok but the brighter bits are a bit blown out and have lost detail and contrast.

[Omaroo]

Yeah Steve - repro3 gets my vote. Good detail coming out and the background contrast is up. :thumbsup:

[bluescope]

Thanks for taking a look guys ... I tend to agree that no.3 is better ... although lacking some of the fainter detail that I managed to bring out in the previous version ... I think no.3 looks more natural ... apart from the blue saturation that I will look into.

Always so much to do and so little time :lol:

[gregbradley]

The 2nd. Some of the colours in the 3rd seem slightly oversaturated.

Greg.

[bluescope]

Thanks for your opinion Greg ... that's why I posted the different versions because I have mixed thoughts ... for and against ... on both.
I think there is more faint nebula detail in 2nd but the stars are better in 3rd etc.

Cheers !

:thumbsup:

[atalas]

Good effort Steve ! I like the 3rd one,the higher contrast lets some more detail pop through.

[bluescope]

Thanks Louie ... most people are picking that version so far.

:thumbsup:

[peeb61]

I have to agree with the majority...Number 3 -detail and contrast.

Great work Steve.

[bluescope]

No worries ... thanks Paul.

:thumbsup:

[TrevorW]

Steve I'm going to be a little different and think if you can acheive something between the 2nd and 3rd images there IMO seems to be some induced noise in the bottom half of the image or it could just be my eyesight and monitor.

Cheers

[bluescope]

Hi Trev ... all ideas are welcome ... which image do you think has noise ?

:thumbsup:

[TrevorW]

3rd image towards middle bottom don't know for sure if noise or speckling or what because I'm new at this.

[bluescope]

I think there are just lots of stars and nebulosity in that area Trev ... it's hard to tell from these small web sized images ... the original file is 4800x3600 pixels and 99.8Mb in size after stacking in DSS ... that's the downside of internet postings. There is quite likely some noise present across the whole image as it is a relatively short exposure for a dedicated CCD astro camera. I really like to do around 2 hours on an object to get smoothness but sometimes the conditions just don't allow it. That's when you start collecting and collating exposures ... that's also when you need to have a permanently aligned observatory setup. It's coming ....... again ...... I really miss it.

:thumbsup:

[TrevorW]

Steve I guess your right sometimes you just can't see the forrest for the stars so too speak. I find it difficult to differentiate sometimes between speckling, noise or faint stars that appear in the processing stage.

Its a fine image regardless.

Cheers

[bluescope]

Thanks Trev !

:thumbsup: