Pillars of Creation - in Technicolour/Hubble comparison

[RB (Andrew)]

Originally Posted by strongmanmike

They can't be tooo purple, that would be too Willy Wonker'ish, juuust a hint

Mike

No of course not, then they'd be Bloated Violet.

[Addos (Adam)]

I think the next step in the amateur astro industry is democratising adaptive optics. Come on ZWO/Synta.....

Originally Posted by Andy01

Purple stars notwithstanding, that's a lovely homage to Hubble, and a fascinating comparison of the difference between amateur and ultra-professional equipment in the best of conditions.

Interesting to see what difference a few billion dollars and perfect seeing conditions makes!

It makes one wonder about the not-so-distant future of amateur astrophotography, when one day, we amateurs may all have access to small satellite-based gear in low orbit.

[Addos (Adam)]

Originally Posted by strongmanmike

Cheers Adam what do you mean by the "glow"?

Mike

The blue glow around the 'finger', very nice!

[strongmanmike (Michael)]

Originally Posted by Addos

The blue glow around the 'finger', very nice!

Ah yes, thought that might be what you meant, cheers

Mike

[Benjamin (Ben)]

Wonderful. Great comparison with Hubble. Tried something similar with lesser gear (and skill) but more to match colour and contast with Hubble but found this process killed off much of the wider field (the eagle’s wings were very clipped). With a narrower FoV it doesn’t matter one bit but curious if this was more about control of dynamic range (which can darken up a core and leave the wings a flappin’)? Pretty sure it’s just not a consideration here but maybe with other data you’ve worked with?

[TrevorW]

Actually prefer the JWT version

[Ryderscope (Rodney)]

A great result Mike. I'm enjoying the discussion on purple (sorry magenta!) stars

[strongmanmike (Michael)]

Originally Posted by Benjamin

Wonderful. Great comparison with Hubble. Tried something similar with lesser gear (and skill) but more to match colour and contast with Hubble but found this process killed off much of the wider field (the eagle’s wings were very clipped). With a narrower FoV it doesn’t matter one bit but curious if this was more about control of dynamic range (which can darken up a core and leave the wings a flappin’)? Pretty sure it’s just not a consideration here but maybe with other data you’ve worked with?

Yes handling the dynamic range for a wide field shot of M16 would be different, if you wished to reveal the ultra fine details within the core as well as the outer spread wings of the nebula, you risk ending up with an unnatural spread of brightness ie a dark looking centre (aka not respecting the light as some call it). This unnatural look is most often seen in images of M42. The tighter FOV of my shot here meant it wasn't really an issue because it is all bright, so everything can be showcased believably

Originally Posted by TrevorW

Actually prefer the JWT version

Shhhh! Trevor.....I haven't told Angie yet we are moving to Lagrange point2

Originally Posted by Ryderscope

A great result Mike. I'm enjoying the discussion on purple (sorry magenta!) stars

I really just see it as a processing choice, I know my slightly magenta stars are not to everyone's taste but I prefer it over all white stars or RGB stars that look "pasted" on top...but largely it's just a nostalgic processing choice for me I think

[N1 (Mirko)]

I don't come to the DSO section too often but when I do, and something like this shows up, I'm reminded that I must visit more often. Great, inspiring work Mike!

[strongmanmike (Michael)]

Originally Posted by N1

I don't come to the DSO section too often but when I do, and something like this shows up, I'm reminded that I must visit more often. Great, inspiring work Mike!

Hey thanks a lot Mirko ...got another one in the pipe line, so don't be such a stranger

Mike

[Paul Haese]

I really like the detail Mike. The site you have definitely has the altitude advantage. Pity we don't have anything like the mountains of South America. Though I am sure you are content with your current locale.

[strongmanmike (Michael)]

Originally Posted by Paul Haese

I really like the detail Mike. The site you have definitely has the altitude advantage. Pity we don't have anything like the mountains of South America. Though I am sure you are content with your current locale.

Cheers Paul and yes, happy with the site conditions, as I have said before, it is no Atacama and after a long honeymoon of many nights with excellent seeing conditions, it has proved mortal and thrown up some soft evenings but as far as seeing and transparency are concerned generally, it's definitely the best site I have ever imaged from and darkness wise it's the second best I have ever viewed or imaged from, so I can't complain

Mike