Quote:
Originally Posted by Octane
Similar to my field from a few weeks ago, through the ED127.
I think you have a bit too much red there, Roger. Try easing back on the red and perhaps introduce a bit of green.
H
|
Thanks H .. seems obvious now. I've updated the image to a new less red one, tweaked the green too. I think it's better without a doubt. Thanks!
Quote:
Originally Posted by TrevorW
Go for gold Roger
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by mental4astro
Stunning amount of detail. Cripes, one of the dust features immediately to the right of the centre of M7 looks like a winged man!
M7 too is one of my favourite clusters. As a youngester, I only could see, and knew of, only the main stars forming this naked eye cluster. Didn't give it too much telescopic attention since until a chart available through IIS showed that M7 is a 4 for the price of one special, with another open cluster (seen here to the bottom right of M7- 'smaller' stars, more densly compacted cluster), a planetary nebula (too small to be seen at this scale), and a faint, small globular cluster (washed out, and probably to small also to make out clearly).
I'm still to find the planetary, but the globular is a little challenging to make out through the glare and confusion of all the bright main cluster stars.
Not doing imaging, I do have a question about the iso speed selected. Of cause this ain't film, but how would a slower speed setting affect the picture, other than making for a slower exposure. I wonder if the speed settings would not affect the colour rendition of the camera somehow. Might there be a colour imbalance occuring at this iso setting somewhere in the hardware?
Alex.
|
Interesting to hear about the Planetary ... I'll have to look at my 100% size image just in case
Good question about the ISO. I chose 1600 because it was a cold night so wasn't too worried about noise (noise being the biggest problem of higher ISO) and in the end I'm glad I chose the higher ISO because noise really wasn't a problem in this particular night.
As for colour I think there is a variation between ISO's on colour balance. I think there have been other people in IIS which have done some ISO tests in recent times and shown a difference in colour, I think that was tested ISO 400 vs 800 but sure 1600 would show a variance too. Interestingly you don't notice it in short "terrestrial"/"normal" photographs (or I haven't at least) but in the long exposure the ISO does seem to have an impact on the colour balance. Perhaps it's that which made my original image redder