Quote:
Originally Posted by alistairsam
Hi Mike,
That is stunning.
But not sure if its my laptop as its not calibrated, do you think it'll look even better if the black point were a bit higher as in darker? I'm no expert but do love contrasts.
I tried it and it really brings out the whole nebula. this is the histogram in gimp without any change.
regds
|
Cheers Alistair.
Hey it may well look better to some presented slightly darker but I think it also depends on, the monitor you look at it on and the program you look at it in, it even looks different when displayed on PBase compared to how it looks on my screen in Photoshop, then there is the degree of ambient light in the room and finally personal preference too I guess? I ,like contrast but hate losing anything in the faint outer areas too
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rigel003
Astonishing image, Mike. We're so used to smaller images of this with a bit of sky around that it's a real jolt to get in close and dirty. So much to see! I especially like the colour contrasts with the gold stars against the blue. As for the fish??!! What is this, a cosmic Rorshach test?
|
Thanks Graeme...yes it all hast to do with the sexual relationship you hat wit your mater as a childt
Mike Oedipus
Quote:
Originally Posted by SkyViking
Fantastic image Mike, definitely one of your best! The tunnel effect is really noticeable, I have never really looked at the Rosette in that way so thanks a lot for this. And all those bok globules and dark condensations, they are really outstanding.
I did wonder where the 'double' set of spikes came from, you seem to have 8 spikes instead of 4. It made me curious. I may be wrong but I don't recall seeing that in your earlier test images with the new scope?
|
Thanks Rolf glad it was a bit of a new experience for you
always hard to create a new experience with such a popular target.
Re the extra diff spikes, see what I say to James below
Quote:
Fantastic image Mike. Tunnel of Fire maybe, but you've certainly accentuated the 3D effect of the rose petals too I think 
A new reference image of this area for sure.
|
Thanks Rob, kind words
Quote:
|
I'd be interested in a bit more detail on how you collect and utilise the NB data if that isn't a trade secret? How many subs of what length and what sort of relative percentages NB/RGB - and is it mainly NB with RGB used primarily on a star mask to make them more natural?
|
Oh god where do I start...I said it wasn't rocket science but the way I do it it would be like Pro Hart trying to describe his technique, looks easy but there are many blends and iterations to get to the final result, it really is like some sort of mad painting session for me
.
Anyway, not sure how helpful they will be but here are a few things I do:
Generally I blend the OIII into the blue, the Ha into the red and SII into the green (adjusting the blend ratios by eye), I then do various blends of these usually by a blend of the Ha and OIII as the luminance in an LRGB process a few times, interating saturation increases and hue changes.
I do compile a straight RGB version from the RGB data and utilise this to impart the colour to both the nebula and the stars at various stages. I combine the Ha frame with a star minimised version of the RGB too in order to get better matching stars to paste in the later stages of the process. I use two of Noel Carboni's actions too, mostly "select RGB stars" and "local contrast enhancement" .
Along the way I use S curves in PS quite a bit (anchored at several points) to accentuate the features and colours I want to.
Then there is various degrees of shadow highlights (very carefully) and unsharp mask to bring out some of the finer details. I do various versions of varying degrees of aggressiveness and blend them together similar to the technique popularised by Ken Crawford for galaxy details - its much more time consuming for large complex nebulae though.
It really feels like a mad painters studio when I process not the methodical accountant type, lots of bit of this bit of that
Hope that..?..was interesting?
Mike
Quote:
Originally Posted by Moon
Mike,
The field of view is really impressive, as is the amazing detail. I'm tempted to buy a bigger monitor & video card so I can fit the 'original' version on my screen. I feel like I'm missing out big time when I view the 'large' version which does fit on my screen.
I also wondered why some stars seem to have 8 spikes - it doesn't distract from the image - just a question how that happens.
James
|
Hi James
You can open the original version and then shrink it in your browser to fit better on your screen.
This happens on the bright stars to varying degrees due to the specific scope design but because I also manually went in and reduced the prominent
halos from around the very brightest stars using the paint brush and clone tools, a few stars I may have inadvertently highlighted these four small spikes trying not obliterate data...?
Mike
) am glad I got some clear skies too, I was going mad reprocessing M42 
