Well done, Chris. A nice crisp image with good detail, and you've gotten rid of that significant amount of vignetting. It is a little clipped at the black end though. If you look at the histogram in Photoshop you'll see that it's cut off abruptly on the left hand side, so many of your faintest details are being rendered as completely black. A simple fix is with Shadow/Highlights (Image - Adjustments - Shadow/Highlight) in PS. Just a suggestion that might be useful.
Well done, Chris. A nice crisp image with good detail, and you've gotten rid of that significant amount of vignetting. It is a little clipped at the black end though. If you look at the histogram in Photoshop you'll see that it's cut off abruptly on the left hand side, so many of your faintest details are being rendered as completely black. A simple fix is with Shadow/Highlights (Image - Adjustments - Shadow/Highlight) in PS. Just a suggestion that might be useful.
Thanks Graeme,
I tried to keep the background natural without too much clipping, seems it was too much. Thanks for the tip with PS, I will give that a go!
Cheers
Chris
Quote:
Originally Posted by RobF
Go Chris!
At least you know M83 well now!
Yeah I do Rob, hope there is a supernova there soon, I am pretty sure I could spot it on the live view screen I know the galaxy so well now!
I think it's not stretched enough, I downloaded it and did a quick curve on it and there's a huge lump of info in there that includes some beaut colours and detail.
I won't post it, not mine to post!
I think it's not stretched enough, I downloaded it and did a quick curve on it and there's a huge lump of info in there that includes some beaut colours and detail.
I won't post it, not mine to post!
Hi Jennifer,
I dont mind, any tips or tricks are welcome, its good to know what else I can do, as I get into a rut and dont try different things. There is probably lots more in the vignetting zone that I toned down.
Quote:
Originally Posted by allan gould
Chris
Thats a huge leap forward, well done.
Each small step is hard won in processing.
Allan
Lots of small steps at the moment Allan, thanks for the encouragement and help.
Nice going Chris, I dig the field size and you have definatly captured some mighty fine and sharp details !
Iterations, I maybe wrong, if so, someone may correct me, I think it is during processing when you increase the curves and levels once, I think you save the image and reopen it to do levels and curves again which would be the 2nd iteration ? ?
So, I would also be interested in the correct undersatnding of an Interation also Chris ? ? : )
As I said, it's just a quick single twirl - in CS3 -
Sometimes I'm not sure whether I should bother to do this as the jpg doesn't have sufficient info to do a decent job and just makes the pic look a bit blotchy.
The reason I do it is to find out if there's more info hiding.
I think there is - and I certainly wouldn't have 'turned it down' to hide details that were showing in the target to reduce the noise if I was processing my own pic.
But that's me, not all people thing the same way.
M83 and M104 are going to get a hammering tonight so I'll see what happens! - I like both targets for the 8" ACF F10 meade.
I'd also like to use the 6.3 Focal Reducer I got to get a decent pic of M42 for my screensaver - F10 won't get me the whole thing.
Nice going Chris, I dig the field size and you have definatly captured some mighty fine and sharp details !
Iterations, I maybe wrong, if so, someone may correct me, I think it is during processing when you increase the curves and levels once, I think you save the image and reopen it to do levels and curves again which would be the 2nd iteration ? ?
So, I would also be interested in the correct undersatnding of an Interation also Chris ? ? : )
Thanks Bob, I am done with this current set of data, I am so over looking at it, I think I have had enough for now. Now once the moon is gone(ish) I am going to give the QHY8 a red hot go while I still have it as I know what the DSLR is capable of, and I quite like the wide field both present.
Thanks!
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheDecepticon
Good effort, Chris! Nice to see you have caught the imaging bug also!
An "iteration" is how many times you have done the same thing. If you did three lots of identical curves, it would be three iterations.
LOL, the "bug" is beating me around a bit lately, as you can probably tell from the mood swings of my recent posts
Cool, thanks David, I will take a look at this one!
Cheers
Quote:
Originally Posted by jenchris
As I said, it's just a quick single twirl - in CS3 -
Sometimes I'm not sure whether I should bother to do this as the jpg doesn't have sufficient info to do a decent job and just makes the pic look a bit blotchy.
The reason I do it is to find out if there's more info hiding.
I think there is - and I certainly wouldn't have 'turned it down' to hide details that were showing in the target to reduce the noise if I was processing my own pic.
But that's me, not all people thing the same way.
M83 and M104 are going to get a hammering tonight so I'll see what happens! - I like both targets for the 8" ACF F10 meade.
I'd also like to use the 6.3 Focal Reducer I got to get a decent pic of M42 for my screensaver - F10 won't get me the whole thing.
You are right Jen, I did tone this down too much, there was a bit too much noise for my liking when the curves were boosted, its a matter of taste I suppose. Good luck with both targets tonight, I am interested to see your results.
Good plan, grab some over the fainter ones the DSLR struggles with, and get *lots* of data so that there is something worth eking out of the noise floor and see what you get.
