My best M16 Eagle

[EzyStyles (Eric)]

Hi Guys,

here's M16 taken sometime last week. Was surprised how it turned out. I can't tell which one is better so i have attached both.

consist of 16 x 84 second exposure stacked.


comments welcome good/bad .
Cheers.

[ving (David)]

what was the diference in processing between them ezy? my untrained eyes cant tell the difference

they look fantastic anyhow

[EzyStyles (Eric)]

thanks davo. the left one is sharper in the centre than the right...slightly..
i think .. my eyes are blurred as i have spent a few hours looking at it.

[strongmanmike (Michael)]

The righthand one loos the best to me although softer around the Eagles head looks a little more natural...? Buuuut then again...? see I haven't even been staring at these images for as long as I am sure you have and I am confused too! :-)

Do you use noise reduction in your images Eric? If you do, which one?

Mike

[EzyStyles (Eric)]

cheers Mike. I use neatimage + photoshop cs2 noise reduction. If you can advise me on anything mike please feel free as I will enjoy learning anything from the master.

[tornado33]

both clearly show the eagle and pillars of creation, well done.
Scott

[Lester]

Like em both Eric,

My eyes cannot find any difference.

[RB (Andrew)]

Both look fantastic Eric, with the left one slighty sharper in the middle like you said.

[strongmanmike (Michael)]

Originally Posted by strongmanmike

The righthand one loos the best to me although softer around the Eagles head looks a little more natural...? Buuuut then again...? see I haven't even been staring at these images for as long as I am sure you have and I am confused too! :-)

Do you use noise reduction in your images Eric? If you do, which one?

Mike

Ok, go easy on the NEAT, it can ruin an image IMO.

Use noise reduction very sparingly as it often gives an image a horrible fake look....IMHO or course :-)

You are a bloody imaging machine though, where are you taking all these piccies from BTW?

Mike

[RB (Andrew)]

Originally Posted by strongmanmike

Ok, go easy on the NEAT, it can ruin an image IMO.

Use noise reduction very sparingly as it often gives an image a horrible fake look....IMHO or course :-)

You are a bloody imaging machine though, where are you taking all these piccies from BTW?

Mike

I agree Mike, I use to use NEAT image a LOT, now I can't remember the last time I used it.

[Striker (Tony)]

I like the middle one Eric...lol

Definelty your best so far.

[EzyStyles (Eric)]

Originally Posted by strongmanmike

Ok, go easy on the NEAT, it can ruin an image IMO.

Use noise reduction very sparingly as it often gives an image a horrible fake look....IMHO or course :-)

You are a bloody imaging machine though, where are you taking all these piccies from BTW?

Mike

Cheers for the advise Mike. What noise software would you recommend?

thanks mate. I do all my imaging in my suburbian backyard.

[EzyStyles (Eric)]

thanks for the reply guys. lol at striker.

[strongmanmike (Michael)]

Originally Posted by EzyStyles

Cheers for the advise Mike. What noise software would you recommend?

I use the noise reduction tools in Noel Carboni's PS actions, Astronomy tools

http://actions.home.att.net/Astronomy_Tools.html

thanks mate. I do all my imaging in my suburbian backyard.

Yeeeah.?..oooo kkkk...where is your backyard then?

Mike

[EzyStyles (Eric)]

oppps Melbourne in Glen Waverley i was thinking of purchasing that tool kit for photoshop.

[Striker (Tony)]

I also do the same Eric...I sometimes over do the noise reduction but like I said it's personal to what looks good....I seem to prefer the soft look then more detail and grainy image......as I get better at what I do I will probably tend to go for higher detail then grainy image.

You should be very happy with your results so far anyway.