Happy New Year with...a bang! - Page 2

strongmanmike (Michael) · #21 03-01-2009, 10:24 PM

Here's the Luminance frame I used for the colour composition, always intersting I find = 30min Lum + 60min Ha + 60min Red

http://www.pbase.com/strongmanmike20...30624/original

Again no sharpening used, this is the raw resolution of the system

The fine details always seem more obvious and vivid in B&W particulartly when Ha is involved.

Mike

gregbradley · #22 04-01-2009, 08:17 PM

Just gorgeaous Mike well done.

Greg.

atalas · #23 04-01-2009, 09:28 PM

Sweet work Big Mike ! as always.

Bassnut (Fred) · #24 04-01-2009, 09:51 PM

Gee Mike, very nice. I dont want to get overly picky with this, but.... I understand the mucking around with hi levels in the RGB version for effect, but the high level in Ha doesnt look as good, it just gives a washed out look. I tweaked the levels (wont post it, you know what I mean) and the filaments fair jump out. Perhaps you could get the background down a bit, just for the Ha version?.

marc4darkskies (Marcus) · #25 05-01-2009, 12:23 AM

Very nice mate - great to see a new image from you!

Does this mean no more repros?!

Can't help feeling though that bumping up the black point / adding some contrast / removing just a teensy bit more blue would improve the rendering of the filaments.

Cheers, Marcus

strongmanmike (Michael) · #26 05-01-2009, 01:59 AM

Thanks guys for your feedback, appreciated

After much mucking around and fiddling throughtout the day (going away and coming back a few times) and taking some constructive critisism on bard...I have now settled on this rendition. Of course I have done the latest tweeking at night in a darkened room so who knows what it will look like in the morning?

The Vela Supernova remnant is an amazing area of the sky, it is huge and this 1.8 X 1.2 deg FOV only takes in a small bit of it so I selected an interesting bit with lots of HII filaments with plenty of amazing intricate detail in them ala the Veil Nebula in the northern sky, similar colouring too.

** Full image details can be found below each image

Small 1500 X 1000 (1.7meg)
http://www.pbase.com/strongmanmike20...99449/original

Large 2500 X 1700 (3.5meg) - good if you want to see all the fine details
http://www.pbase.com/strongmanmike20...99254/original

Luminance only 2500 X 1700 (2.7meg)
http://www.pbase.com/strongmanmike20...30624/original

Hope you like 'em and I better have a rest from this now...I think I am now seeing things...?

Mike

ED: Ok yep, looking at it in the morning again, with the sun up....it still looks a bit blue...sigh, didn't during the night, doh!.......ah well se la vi, it's not that bad I guess but I better leave it for a few days now

..funny if I work on it for a while it starts to look less blue and I keep slowly coming back to pretty much the same look..MAN I'm going crazy! gotta be an eye-brain over time thing..?

strongmanmike (Michael) · #27 05-01-2009, 02:28 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bassnut

Gee Mike, very nice. I dont want to get overly picky with this, but.... I understand the mucking around with hi levels in the RGB version for effect, but the high level in Ha doesnt look as good, it just gives a washed out look. I tweaked the levels (wont post it, you know what I mean) and the filaments fair jump out. Perhaps you could get the background down a bit, just for the Ha version?.

Not quite sure what you mean Fred?

Are you talking about my Luminance shot? If so it is not just Ha it's L+Ha+R so there aint much sky background left in there, it's literally full of heaps of gas, dust and stuff.

This image is basically a black and white shot with a red bias rather like using red sensitive film, still get all the colour photons (from the Lum component) but it's really picking up the red, but all displayed in B&W.

Post your version, I'd like to see it, the "original" size Lum shot at my web site is 2.7meg and 2500 X 1700 so you should be able to do a good job, I'd like to see what you think looks good

Mike

strongmanmike (Michael) · #28 05-01-2009, 05:24 PM

Thaks boys, this image has driven me mad more than most I've done, while I tweek and process I keep coming back to a blue cast without knowing it. My eyes seem to adapt to the blue emphasis and it starts to be unoticable, then when I come back and look at it after a few hours or during the day after processing at night it looks too blue again...hmmm? Perhaps it's an eye-brain thing ie the blue cast becomes less noticable over time after looking at it for a while and each reprocess tweek session arrives pretty much back where I was

. I have come to the conclusion that my brain favours blue and finds it appealing, I see it at first but then it becomes normal after some time and I can't see it anymore. This has been a hallmark of my processing and nearly always it's blue that does it to me.

Oh well I'm gunna leave it for a few days and then come back to it and see what I come up with.

Either way it is indeed a beautifull region to image none the less and basically I am happy with my New Years Eve effort.

Mike

gregbradley · #29 05-01-2009, 05:33 PM

Hi Mike,

I think you have it just right in my opinion. I consider myself well informed on the Vela SNR as I have taken several images of it last year and just finished taking 15 hours of it myself yet to be processed fully. So in total something like 30 hours of imaging this region.

The area is primarily an O111 region not a Ha region hence your blue.
The Ha areas are more the 2 gum nebulas a fair way above and to the left of your image area and possibly the lower more solid areas below and to the left of your image area.

In my O111 subs the background shows extensive O111 gas as well as detail in the filaments that only come out with O111. Ha tends to be more vague in the SNR and a bit general although some structure. My images will be O111 LRGB.

So the reason then I conjecture that you are getting blue backgrounds is you have picked up the general O111 emission in your blue subs and they form a general blue background which is not a gradient but something your camera actually picked up.

I also wonder (I didn't actually test it) whether it is more productive to use 2x2 on the luminance and Ha or O111 as the area is fairly dim especially the luminance which picks up hardly any of these filaments.

The filaments jump out in O111 though and show good detail. Even a 60 second image shows some filament detail in O111.

Cheers,

Greg.

Jen · #30 05-01-2009, 06:02 PM

Nice work Mike

strongmanmike (Michael) · #31 05-01-2009, 07:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by gregbradley

Hi Mike,

I think you have it just right in my opinion. I consider myself well informed on the Vela SNR as I have taken several images of it last year and just finished taking 15 hours of it myself yet to be processed fully. So in total something like 30 hours of imaging this region.

The area is primarily an O111 region not a Ha region hence your blue.
The Ha areas are more the 2 gum nebulas a fair way above and to the left of your image area and possibly the lower more solid areas below and to the left of your image area.

In my O111 subs the background shows extensive O111 gas as well as detail in the filaments that only come out with O111. Ha tends to be more vague in the SNR and a bit general although some structure. My images will be O111 LRGB.

So the reason then I conjecture that you are getting blue backgrounds is you have picked up the general O111 emission in your blue subs and they form a general blue background which is not a gradient but something your camera actually picked up.

I also wonder (I didn't actually test it) whether it is more productive to use 2x2 on the luminance and Ha or O111 as the area is fairly dim especially the luminance which picks up hardly any of these filaments.

The filaments jump out in O111 though and show good detail. Even a 60 second image shows some filament detail in O111.

Cheers,

Greg.

Of course, you're right, the reason I don't seem to be able to change it to what my minds eye percieves to be correct is becasue..well...it is probably already pretty much ok.

Mike
I had thought'a that but wasn't so pretentious to suggest it, so thanks