Thanks for the nice comments guys, much appreciated.
I isolated the stars a bit this time, and yes they lost a bit of pop unforch.
I did more than 54hrs, but that kind of time allows deleting dodgy subs which is also a luxury ;-).
APODs are pretty extreme these days, gunna have to crank it up to try that again.
Thanks for the nice comments guys, much appreciated.
I isolated the stars a bit this time, and yes they lost a bit of pop unforch.
I did more than 54hrs, but that kind of time allows deleting dodgy subs which is also a luxury ;-).
APODs are pretty extreme these days, gunna have to crank it up to try that again.
Yes - did you remove stars in Photoshop using "fill" & "content aware" &
then paste an earlier version of the stars back in?
There seems to be a signature of stars processed that way
& yet not fully put back.
I just had another starless layer I sharpened on. I think the blend between stared and starless versions was wrong. Unforch I flattened before saving the PSD file, so im stuck fixing it without starting from scratch.
I just had another starless layer I sharpened on. I think the blend between stared and starless versions was wrong. Unforch I flattened before saving the PSD file, so im stuck fixing it without starting from scratch.
Yes - I compared it with another pic on the web
& there are actually missing stars with white rings around them.
Some quite bright stars have almost disappeared.
Here is one of them & the picture is enlarged.
Hi Fred, I really love the image, wish I could produce something so stunning.
Please don't think I'm being picky(you've already mentioned reason above) but while looking at the full-size last night I noticed some phantom diffraction spikes and wondered where the star had gone
That's absolutely gorgeous Fred, the colours are really intense and the overall level of detail is great. Those globules look incredible floating in front of the nebula. Certainly not bad for a mere 54 hours
I'd have to agree with the others re the stars though, seems the processing took its toll on them. A pity you don't have the psd file as you say, it would probably have been an easy fix. But you can perhaps isolate the stars from a stretched version of the raw FITS and blend them in to taste.
Awesome work, I reckon it's probably your best image to date.
Hi Fred, I really love the image, wish I could produce something so stunning.
Please don't think I'm being picky(you've already mentioned reason above) but while looking at the full-size last night I noticed some phantom diffraction spikes and wondered where the star had gone
You're right,
How could such a bright star be missing?
It has left it's diffraction spikes behind.
If you go - in Photoshop:
select color range, highlights,
it would pick up that star easily for a copy & paste.
The data is so good that if re-processed it's worth an APOD.
The colours & fine detail is astonishing - it's just those stars.
Oh gaud, that's what 3-cans-of-Guiness processing does . I'm not adverse to getting sick of processing troublesome stars and just deleting them, not smart leaving phantom diffraction spikes though . I was tempted at one stage posting starless, wish I had now, but then would've copped another world of grief . Not really APOD smart processing either .
I just run out of patience when it gets to stars, daft really given the time getting the data, not an appropriate use of pristine data you might say .
I've got a feeling I need at some stage to repro a few megadata efforts properly and do them justice .
APODs are pretty extreme these days, gunna have to crank it up to try that again.
I dunno Fred, it is a bit hit and miss as far as I can see, usually the APOD image is at least reeeeasonably awesome (and yes, often incredible too) but sometimes they do display quite ordinary efforts and occasionally even some real huh? wha tha? images appear up there (not to mention regular repeats). I think they must rush the picks sometimes
Fred, do you find blooming an issue with the stars with this setup? I often wonder how a KAF6303e would go on my setup. I suspect it would be great but wonder if the blooming is an issue or more just annoyance. I often have to work on the stars with the Trius anyway.
Thanks again Guys, its certainly a pleasure processing solid noise free data ;-).
Greg I rarely have blooming trouble (with 3nm NB that is) and if so just a bit with 1 or 2 stars even with 40min subs, bin1 or 2 . ETA was a shocker of course even with 20min subs. You would need FAR less time per sub for the same result.
Beautiful One Fred,
Your images have always insprired me, (and still do even after my long break from Astro). I often seek out your work and StrongmanMike's as the gold standard.
. I'm not adverse to getting sick of processing troublesome stars and just deleting them, not smart leaving phantom diffraction spikes though 
(not to mention regular repeats). I think they must rush the picks sometimes 
Totally awesome result 
