Go Back   IceInSpace > Equipment > Software and Computers

Reply
 
Thread Tools Rate Thread
  #1  
Old 31-08-2006, 12:29 AM
ballaratdragons's Avatar
ballaratdragons (Ken)
The 'DRAGON MAN'

ballaratdragons is offline
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: In the Dark at Snake Valley, Victoria
Posts: 14,412
Which Processing do you Prefer from these samples

I need some help please.

I captured these widefields of Sagittarius tonight and I can't work out which one is the best processing result.

They are all very different. Apart from focus not being quite sharp and fog making it a bit harder, I need to know which processing is better.

All are taken with Toucam Pro II 840k mounted on camera mount and tracking on EQ1. No Scope!

Which one do you prefer? Which one is correct? HELP!!!
Attached Thumbnails
Click for full-size image (sagg aug 30 2.jpg)
79.0 KB20 views
Click for full-size image (sagg aug 30 3.jpg)
88.3 KB12 views
Click for full-size image (sagg aug 30 4.jpg)
109.5 KB11 views
Click for full-size image (sagg aug 30 sec 1.jpg)
115.9 KB29 views
Click for full-size image (sagg aug 30 sec 2.jpg)
117.5 KB9 views
Click for full-size image (sagg aug 30 sec 3.jpg)
82.0 KB8 views
Click for full-size image (sagg aug 30 sec 4.jpg)
122.2 KB4 views
Click for full-size image (sagg aug 30 sec 5.jpg)
134.1 KB35 views

Last edited by ballaratdragons; 31-08-2006 at 12:45 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 31-08-2006, 01:04 AM
RB's Avatar
RB (Andrew)
Moderator

RB is offline
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 26,622
Ken I think the 1st and the last are closest to the money.
I had a look at the histogram in PS of these two and they are close to what it should look like.

Edit: Had another look and I also like the fourth one on the top line.
So much for helping you, sorry Ken.

If I had to pick I'd say the fourth on the top line.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 31-08-2006, 01:10 AM
ballaratdragons's Avatar
ballaratdragons (Ken)
The 'DRAGON MAN'

ballaratdragons is offline
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: In the Dark at Snake Valley, Victoria
Posts: 14,412
Thanks Andrew.

The funny thing is, 1 & 8 are as different as chalk and cheese. So I still don't know which way to process them

Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 31-08-2006, 01:13 AM
RB's Avatar
RB (Andrew)
Moderator

RB is offline
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 26,622


I just edited my original post before I read your reply.

Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 31-08-2006, 01:19 AM
ballaratdragons's Avatar
ballaratdragons (Ken)
The 'DRAGON MAN'

ballaratdragons is offline
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: In the Dark at Snake Valley, Victoria
Posts: 14,412
Yep

I prefer numbers 2 & 4, just didn't know which one of the eight is processed correctly.
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 31-08-2006, 01:37 AM
RB's Avatar
RB (Andrew)
Moderator

RB is offline
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 26,622
On my monitor #2 shows a blue hue.
It's difficult to choose because there is noise.
Don't forget the last one shows the Sagittarius area in the colour it looks like in DSLRs.
I'd say if you can combine the 4th and the last you'd have a good combination.

(I think I'd better shut up now)......
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 31-08-2006, 08:27 AM
[1ponders]'s Avatar
[1ponders] (Paul)
Retired, damn no pension

[1ponders] is offline
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Obi Obi, Qld
Posts: 18,778
On my laptop I prefer number 2 and 6. I don't know if there is a "correct" way of processing Ken. If I processes something on my laptop and then view it on my desktop, often while looking fine on the laptop it will look terrible on the desktop, but not necessarily visa versa. For me each monitor shows an object differently. Also processing is a very personal thing. I'll often prefer an image that doesn't show as much colour or detail over a different processing if the second one has clipped stars and bright objects. To me it doesn't look as natural.

Hope that helps
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 31-08-2006, 08:33 AM
Geoff45's Avatar
Geoff45 (Geoff)
PI rules

Geoff45 is offline
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Sydney
Posts: 2,631
Here's one I took. The colours are similar to the last of the 8
Attached Thumbnails
Click for full-size image (sag star cloud v5 very low res.jpg)
145.1 KB14 views
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 31-08-2006, 08:40 AM
Geoff45's Avatar
Geoff45 (Geoff)
PI rules

Geoff45 is offline
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Sydney
Posts: 2,631
Quote:
Originally Posted by [1ponders]
On my laptop I prefer number 2 and 6. I don't know if there is a "correct" way of processing Ken. If I processes something on my laptop and then view it on my desktop, often while looking fine on the laptop it will look terrible on the desktop, but not necessarily visa versa. For me each monitor shows an object differently. Also processing is a very personal thing. I'll often prefer an image that doesn't show as much colour or detail over a different processing if the second one has clipped stars and bright objects. To me it doesn't look as natural.

Hope that helps
The problem of different monitors showing different colours goes away with proper "colour management" (google this or look at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Color_management for a succinct summary). You can get software or (much better) hardware to calibrate your system so that things look pretty much the same on all your monitors and more importantly on the printout.
Geoff
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 31-08-2006, 09:07 AM
[1ponders]'s Avatar
[1ponders] (Paul)
Retired, damn no pension

[1ponders] is offline
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Obi Obi, Qld
Posts: 18,778
I find colour calibration of laptops to be a real hit and miss exercise (I have three LT I use, plus a desktop flatscreen and a crt (which has just died )), especially with the newer ones that don't have contrast control. Even using utilities such as Adobe Gamma Adjust, many of the programs rely on visual perception of the screen, which will change depending ambient light conditions, age of the monitor, monitor temperature etc. I've considered the hardware option, however of some of the more reliable systems can be quite expense, ridiculously so at times.

For me the bottom line was always do my processing of tonal adjustments on the CRT (now using the flatscreen or hooked up to a plasma) to try to ge it somewhere near acceptable. The laptops are a last resort.
Reply With Quote
  #11  
Old 31-08-2006, 09:15 AM
ving's Avatar
ving (David)
~Dust bunny breeder~

ving is offline
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: The town of campbells
Posts: 12,359
4 and 8 for me thanx ken
oh and a flat white with 2 sugars
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 31-08-2006, 09:18 AM
Geoff45's Avatar
Geoff45 (Geoff)
PI rules

Geoff45 is offline
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Sydney
Posts: 2,631
[quote='[1ponders]'] Even using utilities such as Adobe Gamma Adjust, many of the programs rely on visual perception of the screen, which will change depending ambient light conditions, age of the monitor, monitor temperature etc. I've considered the hardware option, however of some of the more reliable systems can be quite expense, ridiculously so at times.

quote]

Yes, Adobe Gamma is not good on LCD monitors. You also need to update calibration regularly and always work under the same lighting conditions. Some of the pros calibrate monitors daily, but monthly is probably OK for normal people. Spyder is probably the cheapest hardware option. I got one in the US for $US200, but the Aussie version costs more than twice as much--I can't think why, it's the same product. Still, even $500 is not a great expense in terms of the total cost of scope, mount, imaging devices, laptop, etc.
Geoff
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 31-08-2006, 11:17 AM
rogerg's Avatar
rogerg (Roger)
Registered User

rogerg is offline
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Perth, Western Australia
Posts: 4,563
I usually prefer a more "dusty" colouring, and not the blue cast type colourings. As such, I'd be choosing the last one.

Roger.
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 31-08-2006, 11:23 AM
rogerg's Avatar
rogerg (Roger)
Registered User

rogerg is offline
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Perth, Western Australia
Posts: 4,563
Quote:
Originally Posted by ghsmith45
....Spyder is probably the cheapest hardware option. I got one in the US for $US200, but the Aussie version costs more than twice as much--I can't think why, it's the same product. Still, even $500 is not a great expense in terms of the total cost of scope, mount, imaging devices, laptop, etc.
Geoff
I hired a Spyder from my local Camera House (Gerry Gibbs Camera House) here in Perth. They hire it out for about $40/week which is very affordable. I also know a pro lab in town which does the same (Mirage Photographic). Others might have similar places in their own cities.

I too only trust what my CRT shows me, the laptop LCD is quite a hit and miss thing. And my observatory CRT is no good because it always gets turned up and down in brightness.

Roger.
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 31-08-2006, 01:27 PM
Striker's Avatar
Striker (Tony)
Whats visual Astronomy

Striker is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Brisbane
Posts: 5,062
I'm going with number 4.
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old 31-08-2006, 07:22 PM
ballaratdragons's Avatar
ballaratdragons (Ken)
The 'DRAGON MAN'

ballaratdragons is offline
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: In the Dark at Snake Valley, Victoria
Posts: 14,412
Thanks all.

In other words, Process it to where I am happy with it

Now to get the focus right
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 31-08-2006, 09:40 PM
jjjnettie's Avatar
jjjnettie (Jeanette)
Registered User

jjjnettie is offline
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Monto
Posts: 16,741
Goodness knows I'm no expert, but image 4 does it for me.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT +10. The time is now 08:00 AM.

Powered by vBulletin Version 3.8.7 | Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Advertisement
Bintel
Advertisement