Twice Cooked Lobster (now updated, finished at last!)
Folks, this is a completely reprocessed and reworked version of the Lobster Nebula NGC 6557 in NB.
Total of 21 Hrs data gathered from the light polluted backyard back in April.
It's been reprocessed in STARTOOLS, which I have really enjoyed learning and using this week - (as you do when it's cloudy and you're stuck in bed with the 'flu).
With Strongman Mike and others deservedly constructive past criticism about my "Paint by Numbers" processing habits ringing in my ears, I'm hoping that I may have had a watershed moment in reprocessing data now.
High res version is here... seems much clearer than my previous attempts.
I have been gobsmakked by this app. (now that I've taken the time to try learning it properly!) It's an easier learning curve for visual people like me - but backed up by some incredibly intuitive advanced math algorithms.
The Autodev, LP Removal (wipe), Deconvolution, HDR (steady on), Wavelet sharpening and Noise reduction modules work brilliantly but yes, there's more. Star masking, Star reduction and even more features that I havn't properly explored yet, and it works on my mac Be warned, it's a memory hungry beast though!
Images were captured and stacked in Nebulosity, processed in Startools and assembled in HST NB Palette in PS.
Highly recommended and at A$60 for the full licence - great value
Comments and feedback welcome - (I have thick skin and it's the only way I learn)
It's a magnificent object this one and the colours are quite attractive but sorry Andy, it looks very posterised : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posterization gives it a water colour painting look.
I'm thinking maybe too many Startools filters this time..? Not sure how to fix it but another shot at it might find the culprit steps in the processing
It's a magnificent object this one and the colours are quite attractive but sorry Andy, it looks very posterised : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posterization gives it a water colour painting look.
I'm thinking maybe too many Startools filters this time..?
Mike
Hmmm, er thanks he said - (runs off to get strong drink) - gulp, wasn't expecting that! - Did you compare it to the original one? http://www.astrobin.com/full/169902/0/
This was the new Luminance layer after Startools reprocessing - I thought this was ok. I'm unable to make it any sharper than this with my present skill set, but open to suggestions to remedy. http://www.astrobin.com/full/208173/0/
The luminance layer is looking good, doesn't have the same pastel look, actually has a considerable amount of detail
Hmmm - ok, thanks for the heads up Colin - stay tuned, see revision below
Quote:
Originally Posted by Somnium
looking good Andy, i wonder if you can tease out the dust detail in the surrounds a bit more, seems like there is a bit of data there
Thanks Somnium, based on that feedback - try try again! Here's a revision backing off one step ie: no Startools star size reduction, and then adding two highpass sharpening layers, one for for small and one for large scale detail at 50% opacity each.
This a bit of a head spin, dont know what to make of this, paint by numbers springs to mind . Look, Im a ST fan boy, use it all the time, it has features no one else can match. I dont even know why the hell you would bother with anything else actually. But, jeez, a slider has been pushed too far somewhere here. The power ST has needs to be used carefully sometimes, specially ending the tracking process, Ive had similar problems. The latest version tries to mitigate the likely hood of this happening ive noticed.
Overall a pretty good image but as others have mentioned it looks overprocessed. It looks like some of those overprocessed PI images.
I am not against PI but it was used by some to create this artificial exaggeration of existing more subtle details and tonal variations much like narrowband brought out structure not seen in full spectrum images.
But I am a fan of your high impact images. I am sure its recoverable but you probably have to restart early on to regain control.
I think its worth it as this object shows very well in NB as in full spectrum it tends to be another boring all red neb.
I like the second version the most. Echoing others, data looks over processed - I would love to see the result of just stacking, stretching and colour tweaking of this data, without star reduction, wavelet sharpening, noise reduction...simplicity can help to reveal the true nature of things
But, jeez, a slider has been pushed too far somewhere here. The power ST has needs to be used carefully sometimes, specially ending the tracking process, Ive had similar problems.
Quote:
Originally Posted by gregbradley
But I am a fan of your high impact images. I am sure its recoverable but you probably have to restart early on to regain control.
Greg.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Slawomir
Hi Andy,
I like the second version the most. Echoing others, data looks over processed - I would love to see the result of just stacking, stretching and colour tweaking of this data, without star reduction, wavelet sharpening, noise reduction...simplicity can help to reveal the true nature of things
Thankyou for your incisive comments - Please review this gents...
I think the last step-NR is too intensive. But in the end, it is your photograph and your workflow, so as long as you like it, that's all that really matters
I think its in step 2, the contrast.
if you look at the first one, the nebulosity seems continuous for want of a better word, as you've increased the contrast, it seems to be broken up.
just using layman terms here.
The contrast module in ST is very powerful and needs to be handled gently.
I tend to keep strength to 45% and dark anomaly to 3, expose dark areas, yes.
Same with the sharpen module. needs to be light to maintain that fluid look.
That's my 2c
Hard to make out with the small snippet, but this is what I was referring to. first to last.
Edit: this is highly subjective and I recall Ivo's version of Eta wasn't widely accepted so its up to personal taste and user perception to a certain extent.
you can sharpen small features without changing the overall look.
I think the last step-NR is too intensive. But in the end, it is your photograph and your workflow, so as long as you like it, that's all that really matters
Thanks Slaw, it's all about learning the rules so I can maybe break them later, but knowing how to control which ones I want to break!
I think its in step 2, the contrast.
if you look at the first one, the nebulosity seems continuous for want of a better word, as you've increased the contrast, it seems to be broken up.
just using layman terms here.
The contrast module in ST is very powerful and needs to be handled gently.
I tend to keep strength to 45% and dark anomaly to 3, expose dark areas, yes.
Same with the sharpen module. needs to be light to maintain that fluid look.
That's my 2c
Cheers
Alistair
Thanks Al - for this version http://www.astrobin.com/full/208173/C/?real=&mod= I have rejected 4 hrs of data from night two which on closer inspection, revealed a bit of passing light cloud/haze. It's likely that this contributed to overall softness. That said I have eased up on the final NR from 4.5 to 2.5 but BOOSTED the Decon from 1.5 to 2.0 which has sharpened things up considerably, but is now borderline on decon rings. I'll keep an eye on the contrast in future as well
Here's a draft colour version with the new Luminance added - colours still need a tweak.
Be warned, it's a memory hungry beast though!
: 
. Look, Im a ST fan boy, use it all the time, it has features no one else can match. I dont even know why the hell you would bother with anything else actually. But, jeez, a slider has been pushed too far somewhere here. The power ST has needs to be used carefully sometimes, specially ending the tracking process, Ive had similar problems. The latest version tries to mitigate the likely hood of this happening ive noticed.
