Jupiter LR Deconvolution Reprocess

[asimov (John)]

Trying to get my head around this splitting & deconvolution stuff at present.

I restacked my original AVI taken a week or so ago, but this time no waveletts. Saved as a BMP rather than JPG like I usually would.

Taken into Astraimage, split & LR deconvolution to all 3 channels. Further tweaked in picture publisher.

[Lester]

Great images Asi. Here is another word for me to remember. Deconvolution, sounds like it is undoing something.

[asimov (John)]

Correct Lester. It means the undoing of convolution.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deconvolution

[Lester]

Yep, Read the article, Didn't understand all or any of the algebra, but that it sharpens images taken with telescopes.

Must go now Joop is waiting for me.

[iceman (Mike)]

I like it asi - can you post the original alongside so I can directly compare?

[asimov (John)]

Done Mike, but the originals up the other way, lol

[Robby]

Lovely image Asi!! Stunning.
LR Deconvolution is a process to undo the convolution of the optics. Essentially the process analyses a star knowing that it should be a pinpoint of light and works out what the optics did to it to make it the shape on the image.
I have always been higly suspect of doing LR Decon on planets and am of the view that the results are from good luck rather than true LRD. The reaon being is that with a stacked/processed planetary images there is essentially no information left in the image that accurately conveys the convolution of the optics. It has all been processed out. LRD is a process that theoretically should only be applied to RAW images before any processing has been done & the optical information is still present......
However that said, the consistant results that are shown here and in a lot of other planetary images (eg Mike's) indicate that benefit can still be had by using LRD on processed images. Perhaps a "standard best guess" PSF (point spread function) is used?
Well done Asi.. Great image!
Cheers

[iceman (Mike)]

I prefer the original, Asi.

How big is the avi, when zipped? I could have a go at processing it for you, if there's some way I can get it.

[asimov (John)]

Cant get it to you as yet, but a new computer is on the cards here..

[asimov (John)]

And thanks guys

[RB (Andrew)]

Asi John as always, a pleasure to see your work mate, another fine effort.
Well done.
Thanks also to the link explaining Deconvolution.

Robby what you say makes a lot of sense, thanks for your thoughts.

[[1ponders] (Paul)]

Nice reprocess Asi. You are deconning without wavelets?

[davidpretorius]

prefer original, i have not had a lot of success with LR lately with the bigger image scale. If anything, the colour starts to go bluer.

ME seems to still be the best for me. I tried a run of no wavelets and VC deconvolution like bird hinted at in his latest jupiter, but still ME came out the best

[asimov (John)]

Yes, I left the waveletts at default Paul.

Have not tried ME as yet....There just isn't enough hours in the day is there!

[Robert_T]

Hey Asi,

I've had mixed results with this, but find the best images from LR deconvolution with small amt iterations say 3x and smaller curve radius from the default (say 1.5 or less compared with default which is 2). This brings out finer detail. As DP notes it seems less effective on my larger image scale shots where ME deconvolution seems to catchup.

Oh,and lovely shot in every case

cheers,

[asimov (John)]

Yes Robert, I experimented at length with LR decon. with the best results coming from 1 Iterations & 1 or 2 curves. Depends a lot on the image your messing with.

Good fun & good practice to do this in any case.