Quote:
Originally Posted by Placidus
A worthwhile experiment. There seems to be a huge amount of very fine detail but the noise amplification makes it hard to know what is real. I think on balance I prefer your previous version.
Perhaps that amount of deconvolution might work wonders if there was a huge amount of signal.
Best,
Mike
|
I know what you mean Mike, the previous version probably had 10 iterations and more masks. It has less fine detail but doesn’t show the deconvolved noise in the background. Continually trying to get the best of both worlds now
Slowly slowing improving but more data would definitely make it easier. Or maybe a 20” Light bucket
Quote:
Originally Posted by SimmoW
Looks fantastic i reckon Colin! Great central colour too.
Max decon would be better applied via a layer mask, maybe. But when i opened the image it didnt hit me as false, just detailed
|
It has mostly caused that look in the background but I’ve since figured out how to fix it while still leaving the detail.
Still trying to get better looking stars though.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ryderscope
Well done Colin and definitely worth giving it a shot even with the relatively limited amount of data. There is some nice detail in the image and the colour works well.
|
Thanks Rodney, lack of data is a bit of a pain when dealing with various processing steps.