Sorry for another repro of my NGC6334 Cat's Paw. It's more about me refining my processing technique than anything else. I've also challenged myself with a few goals. Rounding out stars that were elongated because this was taken with my ED80 before I got a flattener. Getting colour into the stars, as I've been finding that hard to control with the 40D - usually they end up white. I'm happy with both results.
Along the way I've come up with some Photoshop actions that helped. I've made a quick post here about them, but will create a new thread I think so I don't hijack Marc's thread.
Big part of the processing was separating the stars from the background, so I've posted a starless and stars version. Previous repro attempt and original image to compare were posted here recently if you're interested.
Pretty cool starless version Troy. Thought I think it needs stars. Wide fields normally do. Unless you're using an uber long focal length and the frame is full of nebulosity, you can normally get away with no stars (Reference Fred's lagoon). I enjoyed the neb colour depth. Well done.
That starless version is even better than your previous release.
That's just surreally beautiful. I love it so much. Almost as much as I love the thread title.
Print. Frame. Hang. Admire.
H
Thanks mate. Know anyone with a big a$$ printer capable of such a thing? Hehe.
Quote:
Originally Posted by gregbradley
Starless is cool although there are quite a few artifacts left over. The Clone tool may be your best friend there.
Greg.
Thanks Greg. You don't notice the artifacts as much when the stars are there, hey. I think I've gone cross-eyed playing with all different processing methods on this shot to get to where I'm happy. Might play a bit more to see what I can do with them, but not sure it's worth taking it much further. I'll see what I can do though.
Pretty cool starless version Troy. Thought I think it needs stars. Wide fields normally do. Unless you're using an uber long focal length and the frame is full of nebulosity, you can normally get away with no stars (Reference Fred's lagoon). I enjoyed the neb colour depth. Well done.
Thanks so much, Jase. It's great getting all these tips/critiques from the PP gurus
I like the regular version, nice work with the fainter elements, you've really pulled out the detail,
The starless version....... Don't like the artifacts particularly, I thought you could get filters that just offset the Ha and you subtract one from the other.... Or something like it....
As an exercise, can you select the stars copy them onto a black version of the image, move them 8 or so pixels to one side, use that to create a mask and select that space on the original, then duplicate, move those bits back the 8 pixels, blend back into hhe original image and blur slightly........I'm sure it could be done and not leave any artifacts.
TBH I've spent enough time on these and I won't be annoying you guys with yet another repro post. That being said, I do want to have a bit of a play at what Clive suggested just to see what's possible.
TBH I've spent enough time on these and I won't be annoying you guys with yet another repro post. That being said, I do want to have a bit of a play at what Clive suggested just to see what's possible.
Hey Troy don't worry about people getting annoyed at repros, there is no rule that says thou shalt not repro..?..is there
Sometimes it is good to be able to just share your on going experiments and processing variations so it isn't just between you and your computer all the time, not every post has to be a perfect grand contest entry, there is a lot of interesting stuff and techniques around.. so share'em
As far as this shot goes...it looks quite dramatic and I like it with stars
Know anyone with a big a$$ printer capable of such a thing? Hehe.
that with the ed80!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!
