Quote:
Originally Posted by strongmanmike
As you can see there is also a faint short extension at the bottom of the over exposed main halo in the straight contrast enhanced version (both mine and David Malins) that doesn't really appear on your naturalised image even though the upper brightest arc is very well rendered...and I imagine this is becasue you haven't specifically worked on that feature to show it in the final work..?
Feature specific manipulation produces a record of sorts and certainly shows the location of a faint feature but I am in two minds as to what the achievement is and how accurate the record is...?
That said, it is still a revealing shot 
Mike |
Hi Mike, Thanks
I understand your comments and this is quite an important point, since it is about defining the border between processing and making artifacts (or worse adding details not present in the image!).
I was aware about the presence of a second faint arm on the bottom part, the point is.. it is not visible in my image!
http://www.astrosurf.com/lorenzi/ccd/M83_L_gaussian.jpg
If you check this link you can see the gaussian stretch of the central part of my luminance (color added little info to this).
Apart for the ugliness and several cosmetics defects of the sensor (see the bands I had to remove manually due to a defective column close the sensor
) you can see that there is evident record of the upper arm but no trace of the lower one, or at least nothing I could honestly consider an actual detail
.
So you can see my effort to increase the visibility of the visible arm, but I could not enhance something that was actually not there
*That* is what I cannot consider acceptable (read=cheating)!
So it seems that we opted for two different processes but that your image is still a bit deeper (unless the arm or stream changed recently
).
Thanks for pointing this out
Clear Skies
Marco