[avandonk]

Alchemy we cannot even barely perceive HA. Our visual system has evolved to be most sensitive at the frequencies of light that are in our environment. Colour does not exist! We perceive colour as the ratio of the different frequency (wavelength) intensities as recorded by the receptors in our eyes. It evolved to see prey better against the background and to also see predators against the background.

Most insects can see in the UV. If you look at a flower in UV it is like a landing strip showing the insect where the pollen is. We just see a boring flower and some do give us an inkling by their petal patterns but it is much clearer to an insect.

Our detectors are much better at this task. To represent any 'colour' that is recorded by a modern solid state detectors as a 'real' representation of our visual 'experience' is both futile and unrepresentative.

It is up to us to come to some balance. Yes many images are so overprocessed they make your artistic meter drop to zero. It does depend on what the image is meant to convey. Subtle differences in contrast and 'colour' or a 'real' representation of how the sky would look if your eyes were sensitive enough.

I think both have their place. My bias though is widefields as we 'should see them if we could'. Even that is wrong by your criteria as we cannot see HA. What is toooo RED for HA?

Bert