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.
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.
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.
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
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.
[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
....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.
![[1ponders]'s Avatar](../vbiis/customavatars/avatar45_9.gif){kind=avatar}
)), 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. 
