[Rod771 (Rod)]

Originally Posted by Marios

The second one is much better IMHO, alot more faint detail around the edges. That IDAS filter really is something how polluted are the skys at time of this image?. Have you notice a significant increase in the capture time as result of using the filter?

Thanks for the feedback Marios. I live in Sydney's north west metro area, the sky is pretty murky here. I try to image 90 minutes either side of the meridian. LP filters are essential for F2 imaging in metro areas, a 30 sec image at F2 / iso 800 is completely washed out without one.

Originally Posted by Shiraz

I much prefer the last one - very nice image. I personally think that it is quite reasonable to allow the core to burn out - would add even more to the drama. But that is just an opinion at best and the image is a huge advance on last year.

Thanks Ray Yeah I dont mind over exposed M42 core images as well. I just wanted see how well Pixinsights HDR tool could tame the data, I have no doubt it can in the right hands - Its a tough job for the poor bugger at the keyboard

Originally Posted by SimmoW

Amazing improvement, inspirational!

Thanks Simon

Originally Posted by Rastas

Rod
The use of levels and curves has been a bit too drastic and you have lost or occluded a deal of faint nebulosity which is still there. Also the core has a grey tint due to the blending which can also be rescued.
If you dont mind I had a play.
Also as Mike said the M42 cloud needs a little blue added, but I left that as you processed it.

I was mindful of pushing the background as I know I haven't completely mastered acquiring the right flat frames at the moment. Also wanted to avoid any DSLR blotchiness popping up but it seems to look ok at 800 pixels, nice adjustment.

The core, did you paint colours in or adjust hue and saturation?

Blue curves were pushed, see new image above in post four

Thanks for your input