Saturn 5 April 2013 1628UT

[Paul Haese]

Hey thanks Phil, that is what I was aiming for, to capture what can be observed by the eye in good seeing.

[Satchmo]

Paul - these images are way over-sharpened - the artifacts in the rings are just ridiculous -multiple false shadow rings as a result of oversharpening . I don't understand why you are being so encouraged in present these images . I respect all the effort you go to - I don't respect rather uncritical nature of all the other posters - they are not exactly helping you to produce more realistic images in the future.

Just my 2c.

[Shiraz (Ray)]

Originally Posted by Satchmo

Paul - these images are way over-sharpened - the artifacts in the rings are just ridiculous -multiple false shadow rings as a result of oversharpening . I don't understand why you are being so encouraged in present these images . I respect all the effort you go to - I don't respect rather uncritical nature of all the other posters - they are not exactly helping you to produce more realistic images in the future.

Just my 2c.

I am sure that Paul will speak for himself, but as one of the uncritical posters I think these images do an excellent job of representing the limited detail available at 14inch aperture - the rings have lots of internal structure, and these images show it. for example, Paul's images clearly show the global zones and the main features of the rings in http://spiff.rit.edu/classes/phys235...n_in_color.jpg

[Paul Haese]

Originally Posted by Satchmo

Paul - these images are way over-sharpened - the artifacts in the rings are just ridiculous -multiple false shadow rings as a result of oversharpening . I don't understand why you are being so encouraged in present these images . I respect all the effort you go to - I don't respect rather uncritical nature of all the other posters - they are not exactly helping you to produce more realistic images in the future.

Just my 2c.

No offence Mark, but let's see you do better! These are not over sharpenend. There are some processing artifacts, particular on the limb without the shadow. The shadow on the rings appears on many other peoples images. The rings themselves are actual. Go away!

[Hagar (Doug)]

Originally Posted by Satchmo

Paul - these images are way over-sharpened - the artifacts in the rings are just ridiculous -multiple false shadow rings as a result of oversharpening . I don't understand why you are being so encouraged in present these images . I respect all the effort you go to - I don't respect rather uncritical nature of all the other posters - they are not exactly helping you to produce more realistic images in the future.

Just my 2c.

Mark, I fail to see the artifacts you elude to in your rather critical comments. After looking at the image for quite some time it seems to have a lovely 3D effect that I find quite catching. I understand from what you have posted in the past that you are quite an authority on optics but to make a critique on an image when I don't recall seeing any of yours and have to question if you have the skills or abilities to produce an image such as this let alone critique someone elses.

Paul, I find the image quite catching and a pleasure to look at and admire. I look forward to more like this.

Just my 2c worth.

[niko]

Mark,

is it really necessary to adopt the agressive position you have in your post?

Even if you have reservations about the quality of the image most people would see it as reasonable to introduce these concerns in a positive frame.

To use words like "ridiculous" is un-necessary and to say that you don't respect those that have commented positively on Paul's amazing work in simply rude.

People are impressed with Paul's work and choose to express that. We all benefit from positive feedback too. There's a certain amount of selfish pride we all get from our peers encouraging us.

I would suggest to you that nothing in your post contributes to Paul continuing to improve it just makes you look like a dick.

I know that Paul, as with most of us, welcomes constructive criticism but yours is far from constructive; it boarders on aggressive and at the very least is unhelpful.

From what I can see you have never posted an image yourself on this forum and perhaps "put up or **** up" might be an appropraite phrase here.

I find Paul's work inspirational and let us not forget he is taking an image of another frickin' planet that is 1.2 billion kms from us!

Treat others as you would have others treat you.

Your comments could easily have been conveyed in a more constructive manner

"Paul, terrific effort with Saturn so early in the season. Is it possible it's slightly over sharpened? I can see some artefacts in the rings and perhaps some false shadow. What do you think? To me it looks a little unrealistic because of that. Still, you've had a great imaging run of luck recently. Keep up the good work. Mark"

There ya go, exactly the same sentiments without the hurtful tone.

Easy, any adult can do it it just takes practice!

niko

[asimov (John)]

Well hell, didn't realize this thread had taken a turn...Ok me being a fellow planet imager & all, looking at the image (reprocessed version much better than the original IMO) I'd say it's well within tolerance as far as 'over processing' goes.

What crappola Mark...Having a bad hair day or what?

My 20 bloody cents.

[U.K.Cowboy (Stuart)]

Nice repro Paul.

Over sharp is certainly the right term for Mark's post! What an insult to everyone who has praised these fine images!

[allan gould]

Paul, you could take better images through a coke bottle than I can through any of my scopes as you have proved time and time again. Loved your image as I said previously and keep them coming.
Allan

[Solar (Ralph Smith)]

Holy CRAP have you pinched the Hubble or something Paul.