Quote:
Originally Posted by SkyViking
Very nice result. I've had good experiences with PI's Drizzle implementation. It does introduce some noise as Rick mentioned, but the fine detail is usually in the high S/N areas anyway so the extra noise is hardly noticeable if you blend a standard 1x1 image with a drizzled version using something like a range mask.
|
Rolf, thanks for the comments and for the tip regarding noise. I guess there is no free lunch except to get more data to remove the noise when it crops up. I will have to seriously play with this procedure and see what dithering and drizzling parameters are best for my system.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Slawomir
Hi Allan,
It looks to me that drizzled image has more contrast and the stars are nicer too.
However, I have noticed that one of the stars in the bottom left 'corner' of the galaxy's disk seems to have processing artefacts (dark halos) - just wondering if some of the structures within the galaxy could also be a product of drizzle integration.
It is a nice image nonetheless  |
Thanks Slawomir
The contrast and details are elevated by the procedure but I have compared my image with that of R Jay GaBany (
http://apod.nasa.gov/apod/ap060421.html) as this was the one that showed me the elevating dust that I've been trying to capture. Essentially every detail in his image is present in mine except for a lot less dust and it may be one of my subs has something to give the halo?
But thanks for the comment as it's much appreciated. I will have to run the procedure again with slightly different parameters and see what happens.
Allan