Quote:
Originally Posted by rustigsmed
very nice work Marcus, love the resolution in the core. annoying about the subs!
|
Thanks Russell!
Quote:
Originally Posted by codemonkey
Very nice, Marcus! Nice colour and excellent detail in the galaxies.
|
Thanks Lee.
Quote:
Originally Posted by codemonkey
The antennae look pushed a bit hard for my tastes, the transition to the background seems too abrupt when looking at the full res.
|
Fair enough. It can be a difficult balance to get the transition of such faint elements to be as smooth as they are in reality without megadata. I opted for showing as much as I can with a mere 9 hours of data, even showing faint stars blurred by bad seeing. It can also be a function of the monitor your using too but I'm assuming you have a calibrated monitor. You can check contrast & brightness settings
here:
Quote:
Originally Posted by codemonkey
I recently found good use of bad subs by integrating two sets of data: the good subs, and all the subs. I then made a mask out of a stretched copy of the "all subs" integration (which had bigger stars, blurrier detail), and then replaced the higher signal areas of the image with the good set.
Granted, it doesn't solve all the world's problems, but it did mean that I got a much cleaner background, while preserving detail in high signal areas. Good to smooth out things like the antennae as well.
|
Blending bad subs with good subs is fraught - especially when it comes to the faint background stars and galaxies. Isolating them from the blurring effects of bad subs very problematic.