|
Paul :
Thanks mate, I took the first night of subs, processed the Ha alone and was really happy with the level of detail, I thought I'd have a go at adding some more data... A couple of days later I jumped on IIS to have a bit of a gander and some other images and noticed Martin's image that has an almost identical field of view! so much for originality hahaha!
David :
Thanks, I'm really happy with how this has turned out for a real 'quicky'. I'm really happy with the scope and camera as a combo, for my local seeing it would seem that 0.9"/px is providing wonderfully sharp results, and my processing workflow for narrowband seems to have 'settled' a little bit with a pallete that seems to work well...
Martin / Allan :
I made it intentionally dark considering that I had so little data, and the SII and OIII were decidedly weaker than the Ha.
I guess, similarly, having the stars so reduced is an 'artistic decision' I tend to make, as I purposely remove them, and stretch them separately to the nebulosity, trying to ensure they really don't overwhelm the nebula, considering the SII and OIII data were so short, I had to reduce the brightness of the nebula considerably, and so the stars could have been quite overbearing...
I will never produce/upload a completely starless image, as I think that images lose so much context and depth as a result of star removal, however, the stars are not my subject, so they will always be there, but always be reduced fairly heavily... I'm not necessarily trying to produce a 'true to life' image, or scientifically accurate image, so I'd rather have the stars heavily reduced as that's how I prefer to see them...
I do wish there was more data so I could push the brightness and saturation a little harder, alas, with next to no clear skies this past couple of months, I had to make do with what I could get...
|