reprocessed: Jupiter from April 17 2005

[bird (Anthony Wesley)]

I thought it might be interesting to go back to data from April and reprocess it using some of the new techniques I've learned over the last 6 months or so. I was curious whether or not I could "improve" the image that I got back then.

Here are the two images, the first one is the original result from April, the second one is fresh off the press tonight. They are both based on the same raw data.

regards, Bird

[atalas]

Excellent Bert !

[bird (Anthony Wesley)]

Thanks Ernie!

[ballaratdragons (Ken)]

LOL! Someone called Bert 'Bird' and now Louie is calling Bird 'Bert'. I love it!!!!

Bird, It definately made a difference to the pic. Did you use deconvolution on the 2nd one only?

[bird (Anthony Wesley)]

Ken, the main difference is that I upsampled the raw data 2x before processing on the new version, then scaled it back down afterwards. I read an article somewhere recently that talked about how to correct for undersampled images, and that's what they recommended. It lets me effectively get half-pixel alignment in registax, so features that fall across pixel boundaries are handled more correctly.

Bird

[ballaratdragons (Ken)]

Very clever! I must try it some time when I can work out how to do it. It DID make a difference!

[rumples riot]

The second shows a much better and smoother image. Definitely a nicer processing.

****** amazing, I reckon you have a link to the Hubble.

[RB (Andrew)]

Unbelievable Bird,

Magnificent job.

[Orion]

Very nice indeed!

[iceman (Mike)]

I like the first one better still, Anthony. It appears to be sharper and have more detail in the dark belts, especially around the middle area. Maybe it's just my bias towards sharper looking images, but the 1st one still gets my nod.

It's such a brilliant image either way, i just can't wait to see what you capture on Jupiter this year with your new scope and new camera.

[ving (David)]

umm....

:jawdropinglygood:

wheres that smilie?

[bird (Anthony Wesley)]

Originally Posted by iceman

I like the first one better still, Anthony. It appears to be sharper and have more detail in the dark belts, especially around the middle area.

Yes, the first one is sharper, but I believe that some of those fine details are artifacts introduced by the camera and sharpened up by my processing.

By comparison I think the second one is much cleaner. I debated whether I should apply a final unsharp mask but in the end decided not to. If your screen is a bit soft then you might want to try that to bring up more details.

Bird

[bird (Anthony Wesley)]

Here's the 2x upsampled image. I reduced it to the same size as the April image in the earlier post.

Bird

[Striker (Tony)]

Great image Bird but I am still laughing that Bert is getting the congrats.

Louie must be drinking.

Well done Anthony

[iceman (Mike)]

I agree Anthony, I think level of sharpness is an individual taste, but as you say I guess we have to be careful that we don't introduce artifacts that look like details, especially on Jupiter.

The 2x upsampled one still shows great detail, though I have a preference for only small upsizing and don't really like the enourmous images (thru upsampling) that guys like Robert76 and others do.

Again, just preference.

[asimov (John)]

Awesome Anthony..

[Robert_T]

Hi Bird, well that certainly set the bar high for the coming Jupiter Pole Jump season... think I'm gonna need a longer pole


Best I've seen, awesome!

[Robert_T]

Originally Posted by iceman

The 2x upsampled one still shows great detail, though I have a preference for only small upsizing and don't really like the enourmous images (thru upsampling) that guys like Robert76 and others do.

aaahhh Mike, it's just for some our old and creaky eyes need a boost