OK, OK, I let the cat out of the bag with this image as I released it on the SBIG forums for a reality check and wake up call. Helps to know if I’m on the right path. A few members here also participate on that forum so I apologise for the duplicate post <yawn>. Anyway, here is one of the reprocessed images in which forms part of the CWAS panel. You’ll have to keep guessing on the other images.
I've added no additional data to this image, I figured 11.5 hours was enough considering the data was of good quality (in this game is it ever enough?). Many may recall the previous image had a disappointing magenta tint. I didn’t bother attempting to restore this, instead I reprocessed the image from scratch. So without further ado, I’m pleased to present the reprocessed version of the NGC292 - SmallMagellanicCloud
Notes on the reprocessing (concise version);
No recalibration of course, just used the calibrated fits. Registered in Registar and combined in MaximDL using Sigma-Reject. Luminance went through two iterations of deconvolution which was later masked before being introduced to the image providing greater control. I spent most of the time on the colour balance. Using MaximDL colour combine function, I started with the weights 1.5:1.0:1.5 (RGB respectively), then turned on background equalisation. Reviewing the balance, I noticed the Red channel was still too high, so I settled on subtly dropping this, but the blue needed a boost so when with 1.3:1.0:1.6. I made note of these final weights and cancelled the combine operation. I then used pixel math to subtract the background from each channel, but leaving the pedestal value (100 counts). At this point I used pixel math again to add counts to the each individual R, G, B frame. 130%-R, 100%-G, 160%-B. For some reason I doubted by previous g2v balance I had taken a while back. Checking previous note I had made, I soon realised it was pretty close - 1.35:1.0:1.65. Once the individual R, G, B images had the appropriate counts applied to them, I returned to the MaximDL colour combine function and combine the images with a 1:1:1 ratio. This appeared to work well. To emphasis the fainter regions and wisps of nebulosity, I blended 20% of the R channel into the Luminance. Frames matched using the brightness/contrast tools and noise reduction masks applied in PS. Globulars got some minor treatment. Actually, I cropped them and performed a two phase DDP stretch to minimise core burn while showing the full cluster expanse. The two phases were later recombined and layered into the image. Not much else… that was concise eh?
Strangely, I’m not tired of looking at this image, even having spent approximately four to five times the total exposure time processing it! The full size image presented is actually a 70% reduced image. Darn those CWAS print size limitations…a 16x20 300dpi print does not do this justice. Oh well, Enjoy!
Well jase after doing a ian thorpe and swimming many,many laps through your image,i must say i was almost breathless..or was that reckless??
Nicely done
I assume this is entered in the wide field amateur category?
Bit of touch an go there though, could be a deep sky entry instead, hard call really..?
Mike
Hey Mike. Thanks.
Yeah, I questioned the category of this image a few times myself. It's is a tough one. As I had to proportionately rescale the image to meet the CWAS size regulations, the print looks like it was taken with a 300mm lens (its approximately the same FOV, just doesn't have the resolution of the FSQ operating at 530mm). Technically, as it was taken through a telescope and when you carefully read the category descriptions - Wide Field (camera shots), Deep Sky (telescope shots)...I made the call that Deep Sky was the safest option. Perhaps categories need to be based on FL.
Quote:
Originally Posted by rpsastronomy
Well jase after doing a ian thorpe and swimming many,many laps through your image,i must say i was almost breathless..or was that reckless??
Nicely done
Cheer Rob. The full res is pleasing to sail around. When I thought about this image sometime back, I thought of acquiring copious amounts of Ha data for it. I think this would have delivered a completely different image to what I've presented here. The fainter nebulosity would certainly be more pronounced. I had a hard time balancing this image just as an LRGB (as can be read in the original text). Trying the match the Ha data would have probably given me nightmares on this target as the luminescent blue would have been suppressed without considerable layering work. I think there comes a time when you say enough and move on to another target. If anything I could add to this image with some longer focal length instruments on particular targets to show more structure, but for what its worth I'll let it be. Thanks again.
Quote:
Originally Posted by leon
Truly a gem of an image Jase, I don't think I have ever seen the SMC in such detail, nice work.
Any chance of coming up to the Qld Astrofest and running a few processing classes Jase? I've already go my name down. What a cracker I feel like I haven' been allowed brushes yet and I'm still finger painting.
Any chance of coming up to the Qld Astrofest and running a few processing classes Jase? I've already go my name down. What a cracker I feel like I haven' been allowed brushes yet and I'm still finger painting.
Thanks Paul
Processing classes. hmmm Never thought of it. I've dumped about 1/4 of my brain into these forums providing others guidance on processing - the other 3/4 just doesn't work (blackhole/void). Seriously, I owe a lot to a great friend who works in the prepress industry. She knows Photoshop inside out and I've gleaned a lot from her. She is known as the Pixel Princess. I've attached a cartoon I often laugh about regarding Photoshop. It was at the end of Rob Gendlers Hybrid imaging presentation at AIC in 2005.
Quote:
Originally Posted by JohnG
Another absolute beauty Jase, so sharp........
What more can one say
Cheers
John G
Thanks John. I'm pleased to have finally got around to reprocessing it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alchemy
another fine image..... being as you are entering it in the competition.... hope you do well.
Clive
Cheers Clive. Probably won't get a look in on the day. There are many talented imagers about. Only have to look at last years work. Some really mind blowing work.
Hey Mike. Thanks.
Yeah, I questioned the category of this image a few times myself. It's is a tough one. As I had to proportionately rescale the image to meet the CWAS size regulations, the print looks like it was taken with a 300mm lens (its approximately the same FOV, just doesn't have the resolution of the FSQ operating at 530mm). Technically, as it was taken through a telescope and when you carefully read the category descriptions - Wide Field (camera shots), Deep Sky (telescope shots)...I made the call that Deep Sky was the safest option. Perhaps categories need to be based on FL.
Intersting, so if you had done another 2 frames to add to your current 2 frame mozaic using the FSQ would it still not be a wide field image?.. what about another 4, 5 or 6 frames resulting in a coverage of many square degrees of sky..still not a wide field? What if you had spent several months compiling many 10's of frames and did a mozaic of both the SMC and LMC in the one final image, still done with a "telescope" but certainly now a wide field image surely? The FSQ is basically a 500mm telephoto lens too huh?
Hmm?..seems it is hard to cover all scenarios/deffinitions in imaging contests?
I think John and David will place it where they see fit regardless of which category you have ticked on the entry form anyway so it doesn't really matter in the end.
Hi Jase. A magnificent image. I can see by your abridged processing comentary I still have a long way to go.
Pls keep helping us mere mortals, your assistance is truely valued.
Thanks for a wonderful image. You deserve a win.
Cheers Doug
More than happy to help out where I can.
Quote:
Originally Posted by strongmanmike
Intersting, so if you had done another 2 frames to add to your current 2 frame mozaic using the FSQ would it still not be a wide field image?.. what about another 4, 5 or 6 frames resulting in a coverage of many square degrees of sky..still not a wide field? What if you had spent several months compiling many 10's of frames and did a mozaic of both the SMC and LMC in the one final image, still done with a "telescope" but certainly now a wide field image surely? The FSQ is basically a 500mm telephoto lens too huh?
Hmm?..seems it is hard to cover all scenarios/deffinitions in imaging contests?
I think John and David will place it where they see fit regardless of which category you have ticked on the entry form anyway so it doesn't really matter in the end.
Cracker of an image
Mike
Mike,
Yes, but as you suggest, the same rule would apply if I had of done a 20 frame mosaic with a longer focal length instrument (say 1200mm) delivering a wide FoV. Would you also place such an image into the wide field category? You can only be guided by the categories they have provided. There is no clarity on what defines wide field other than a camera shot (indicating work with a lens if you want to read into it). You’re right the FSQ is just a 500mm telephoto lens, but if you take this simplistic approach so is any APO telescope regardless of FL – its just a glorified camera lens. So where do you draw the line huh?
As suggested, I think the categories need to be well defined based on focal length (though we’ll end up having this same mosaic discussion again) or sky coverage in degrees for example. I think regardless of the definition, you’ll always have overlap. Still if you ask me, I’d still say the FSQ is a telescope and as such DeepSky category is still plausible. I don’t mind if John and/or David place it elsewhere (they have the final say), actually I hope they do as this will provide the guidance for years to come. I didn’t get to finish my 9 frame Eta mosaic this year, it’s on the cards for next if I don’t get distracted. Thanks again.
Quote:
Originally Posted by bluescope
and again ...... so many stars ...... the image just glows.
The subtle detail is amazing Jase. Well done indeed !
Thanks Steve. The luminance contained 15min subs which really brought out the galaxy extension.
Truely an amazing image Jase. Like the colour balance in this reworked version.
Lost count of all the clusters scattered about the image. We can understand how long you must work on your images to capture all the finer detail. It certainly makes it worthwhile with the amazing results you get.
Thanks for sharing your work and also for the time you spend helping other imagers on IIS it's much appreciated.
I didn’t get to finish my 9 frame Eta mosaic this year, it’s on the cards for next if I don’t get distracted. Thanks again.
I think Peter Ward will have one of those..?
I went to your web site and it was pretty easy for me to pick out the images I would have entered if I was you There were about 3 or maybe 4 clear stand outs for me....I'm sure there are a couple you have sent that don't appear on there though huh?
Good luck!.....heck the detailed and complicated processing you go through for your images warrants an award in itself!
He he he, love a competiton, it's exciting
Mike
Last edited by strongmanmike; 07-06-2008 at 10:15 AM.
Rest easy...No 9 frame mosaic from me....the 16 frame effort will have to wait till next year
Jase's SMC is one of the best examples I have seen.
As for CWAS, I can honestly say, I have not been very productive this year....between very poor Sydney weather and my work commitments I have done very little imaging due to sheer lack of imaging time.
.....I suspect is CWAS is also strongly about. Great composition, good colour, simple equipment etc.
CWAS is IMHO Oz's best Astrophotography showcase, and it's great to see excellent work from all around Oz converge at Parkes. I'm sure Images by Jase, Big Mike, Martin P, Eddie T etc will do well.
Peter
Last edited by Peter Ward; 07-06-2008 at 12:08 PM.
Reason: typo
Truely an amazing image Jase. Like the colour balance in this reworked version.
Lost count of all the clusters scattered about the image. We can understand how long you must work on your images to capture all the finer detail. It certainly makes it worthwhile with the amazing results you get.
Thanks for sharing your work and also for the time you spend helping other imagers on IIS it's much appreciated.
Thanks Barb and David. Somewhat an usual approach to colour balancing, though I usually balance the individual R,G,B frames with pixel math. It provides greater accuracy than automatic background equalisation. Pleased to help you out. You’ve certainly come along way since your original posts. Keep at it and thanks again for your comments.
Quote:
Originally Posted by marc4darkskies
A spectacular result for a huge effort Jase. Nice image to sit and gaze at too. It's a winner on a number of levels!!
Cheers, Marcus
Cheers Marcus. I dwelled over this image for sometime. Possibly a winner, but who knows what the day brings. I hope to see some of your work presented.
Quote:
Originally Posted by strongmanmike
I think Peter Ward will have one of those..?
I went to your web site and it was pretty easy for me to pick out the images I would have entered if I was you There were about 3 or maybe 4 clear stand outs for me....I'm sure there are a couple you have sent that don't appear on there though huh?
Good luck!.....heck the detailed and complicated processing you go through for your images warrants an award in itself!
He he he, love a competiton, it's exciting
Mike
Indeed Mike, competitions are a bit of fun. It’s a great time to reflect on what you’ve done and also admire the work of others. I’d be interested in knowing what you think my panel is… If you’re thinking M83, you’re wrong. This image was purely an experimental (combine different focal length data). Plus, Peter entered M83 last year if I recall correctly. Hahaha…you’ll have to keep guessing…I should mention that all images submitted for CWAS were reprocessed, so be careful on your selection. Also, I should add that I had access to a friend’s TOA-150 for two weeks. To my frustration, this turned out to be a nightmare. I didn’t have the right fittings to mount the STL11k so ended up using the 2” nose piece (vignetting was like tunnel vision compared to the 88mm image circle of the FSQ, absolute hell…not sure why, but didn’t have time to investigate). Struggled with balance on the Titan and by the time I took flats etc, all I collected 120min of Ha data. Still, it has significantly enhanced one of the images.
Good luck to you too Mike. I’m guessing at least an Eta image from you. The one you recently present is top shelf work.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bassnut
Excellent Jase, ittle be interesting to see how all those stars look on a 16x20 print. Do you incrementally upscale in PS, or use a dedicated app?.
Good luck
Thanks Fred. For this print, the image wasn’t upscaled. The final aRGB hi-res 16-bit tiff is 4769x3752 @ 2822 DPI (~18mp/102Mb). No need for upscaling there. Unfortunately I had to downscale it because of the CWAS print restrictions. The print turned out ok. You certainly don’t get the same impact of what I’ve presented online in the 3000x2400 resolution. The colours were subtly muted on the print due to the rip conversion of aRGB to CYMK. I should mention that all the prints aren’t the full 16x20…two reasons - Scaling can result in disproportion images if not careful (NGC104 would look rather funny shaped as an oblong) and you need to factor in mounting as well. The latter is optional, but it is my preference. To answer you original question…PS was used for scaling and DPI conversion down to 300. No entries?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Peter Ward
Rest easy...No 9 frame mosaic from me....the 16 frame effort will have to wait till next year
Jase's SMC is one of the best examples I have seen.
As for CWAS, I can honestly say, I have not been very productive this year....between very poor Sydney weather and my work commitments I have done very little imaging due to sheer lack of imaging time.
.....I suspect is CWAS is also strongly about. Great composition, good colour, simple equipment etc.
CWAS is IMHO Oz's best Astrophotography showcase, and it's great to see excellent work from all around Oz converge at Parkes. I'm sure Images by Jase, Big Mike, Martin P, Eddie T etc will do well.
Peter
Cheers Peter. I look forward to seeing what you come up with. The theme of “Star trails in the landscape” for this year will be interesting. Shame it wasn’t last year as you would have had it “licked”. I agree, there are many talented imagers about. If I was a betting man, my money would be on Steve Crouch in ACT. I’ve been monitoring his progress with his newly acquired 12.5” RC. The first few images were sub optimal, but he’s really got the rig and processing in tune at the moment. His recent APOD image on the Running Chicken Nebula was a “king hit, knock down - remarkable” - http://apod.nasa.gov/apod/ap080418.html
Thanks again
Quote:
Originally Posted by RB
LOL Jase, I got vertigo, when I opened the full size (70%) version.
What a stunning image mate, what more can I say, except thank you for sharing with us and helping us with your concise advice and suggestions.
All the best in the competition.
Cheers
PS cartoon was a crack-er
Hey RB. Thanks for your comments. Hope you’ve entered some of your work with the 130. You’re up there with them… Its time to pounce.
======
Thanks to all who have commented. I wish good luck to those who have entered the competition. This is probably the pinnacle of astrophotography in Oz. The event will certainly bring many more to our guild as we promote the glorious heavens above.
When I thought about this image sometime back, I thought of acquiring copious amounts of Ha data for it. I think this would have delivered a completely different image to what I've presented here. The fainter nebulosity would certainly be more pronounced. I had a hard time balancing this image just as an LRGB (as can be read in the original text). Trying the match the Ha data would have probably given me nightmares on this target as the luminescent blue would have been suppressed without considerable layering work. I think there comes a time when you say enough and move on to another target. If anything I could add to this image with some longer focal length instruments on particular targets to show more structure, but for what its worth I'll let it be. Thanks again.
![[1ponders]'s Avatar](../vbiis/customavatars/avatar45_9.gif){kind=avatar}
I feel like I haven' been allowed brushes yet and I'm still finger painting. 
Never thought of it. I've dumped about 1/4 of my brain into these forums providing others guidance on processing - the other 3/4 just doesn't work (blackhole/void). 
Seriously, I owe a lot to a great friend who works in the prepress industry. She knows Photoshop inside out and I've gleaned a lot from her. She is known as the Pixel Princess. I've attached a cartoon I often laugh about regarding Photoshop. It was at the end of Rob Gendlers Hybrid imaging presentation at AIC in 2005.
The FSQ is basically a 500mm telephoto lens too huh? 
and 
, this turned out to be a nightmare. I didn’t have the right fittings to mount the STL11k so ended up using the 2” nose piece (vignetting was like tunnel vision compared to the 88mm image circle of the FSQ, absolute hell…not sure why, but didn’t have time to investigate). Struggled with balance on the Titan and by the time I took flats etc, all I collected 120min of Ha data. Still, it has significantly enhanced one of the images.
