Quote:
Originally Posted by strongmanmike
Well, yes, I guess under extreme scrutiny almost any system will reveal something imperfect, in fact and even though it is not displayed at full res and to me it doesn't matter, the stars are not uniformly round in your shot either  nor in Rolfs if you look closely...it's the nature of our beasts  but it doesn't detract from the overall visual experience in my opinion, we can become way too fixated on optical perfection rather than imaging sometimes Newtonians are indeed very hard to get absolutely perfect in all situations, especially fast ones, but never the less produce arguably superior sharper looking images to many RC's and certainly to SCT's, of significantly longer FL  |
Yeah, I have a tilt problem to sort out, the upper 1/4 of my images are hard to keep in focus, everything else is in focus, except the upper 1/4, shows up in the corners. You don't need full resolution to see it either. A problem to be sorted at another time, may require shimming something. I need to discover if it's in the camera/corrector or the focuser. Wanna lend me your scope??
Quote:
Originally Posted by strongmanmike
Hey, perhaps you are right... but in the end it is a processing choice and the level of sharpening is usually an aesthetic choice in most cases rather than actually revealing real extra details without looking noisy. I did try sharpening more during processing of the main bi colour image (I worked out how to use the decon better in Astroart  ) but yes, as you say with your version (sorry) it looked slightly "over" sharpened and didn't actually show any more real "features". I decided I liked it looking ever so slightly soft rather than super hard edged...all the same features are still there - again just a choice  . |
What can I say, I like 'em sharp, although most of the time I'm sharpening for differential contrast, trying to make the black bits blacker. I'm OK with what it does to the noise. I'm constantly on the lookout for a method to treat the noise differently, it'll come in time and experimentation.
Quote:
Originally Posted by strongmanmike
The seeing was pretty good for my Halpha  
Thanks again for taking the time to make a worthwhile response |
Yeah, the seeing was good for my place, but that's still not good by any reasonable measure. Looking at my data I might just do a Sidonio on it boost the contrast a bit and sharpen less. Always willing to learn. It's also cloudy and rainy here.
Always happy to critique your work Mike, it's the only way we get better. You can look at an image for days and not see a simple error that someone else picks up in seconds.
Cheers
Stu