Dunno if the crop is more appealing than the original in this case Mike, perhaps if the crop had been the original FOV you may have processed it differently . As Jase says, saturation could be tweaked, but I know how you like the look of your images, so I dont think it was a mistake as such, you dont like crayon drawings. I like it anyway .
I had a poke at tweaking myself, not that its better by any means, and im sure youll hate it, just for fun Mike, only different
No I don't hate it Fred, looks quite good I have done so many variations already with this data and along the way various versions actually did look quite like what you have done but as you have recognised I do seem to have a certain "look" that I guess I favour, I like to show the outer fainter extremities and usually prefer a slightly softer feel over high contrast..? But then again it varies from image data set to image data set Take a look at my deep Helix for example
It is all good stuff Mike. Here is an animated gif of your image with one of mine done with a 6" or 150mm achro in NB. As you can see your image has far better resolution. It is not just the fact your Starfire has nearly twice the focal length but the inherent quality of the optics.
I am just pleased with the results I can get with a $1000 achro. The superb resolution you are getting with the same aperture just goes to show you gets what you pay for.
I am just pleased with the results I can get with a $1000 achro. The superb resolution you are getting with the same aperture just goes to show you gets what you pay for.
Although Mike's optics are certainly razor sharp I think you're shot may be slightly out of focus Bert. I have a similar shot taken on a basic ED80 barlowedx2 which is much closer to Mike's rendition.
Marc focus is as good as I can get it. I am using the achro with a FR/FF at f/4.25 to get a wider field. I don't think that a 150mm diameter F5 APO could be built. If it could I would guess it would cost a heap. Aberrations are far harder to eliminate at high convergence angles.
Below is the full FOV of the achro.
Marc focus is as good as I can get it. I am using the achro with a FR/FF at f/4.25 to get a wider field. I don't think that a 150mm diameter F5 APO could be built. If it could I would guess it would cost a heap. Aberrations are far harder to eliminate at high convergence angles.
Below is the full FOV of the achro.
Bert
Makes sense now. The image scale is way different. Very cool widefield btw. Lovely colors.
It is all good stuff Mike. Here is an animated gif of your image with one of mine done with a 6" or 150mm achro in NB. As you can see your image has far better resolution. It is not just the fact your Starfire has nearly twice the focal length but the inherent quality of the optics.
I am just pleased with the results I can get with a $1000 achro. The superb resolution you are getting with the same aperture just goes to show you gets what you pay for.
Bert
Cool stuff you come up with Bert It's great to also have the wide field of view too though huh?
Very dyanamic image but whats this Sidoino that keeps being mentioned,I assume is some processing tip but i must have missed the thread.
Cheers
Sidonio - Doing a Sidonio - The art of reprocessing old data to attain different, and sometimes more pleasing results.
Mike - The tarantula at 480mm is a ridiculous little speck of nebulosity in a sea of stars! I will be doing a HST pallete image of it hopefully december at both 480mm and 1000mm just to show different perspectives..
hooley dooley Mike thats a nice pic 
. As Jase says, saturation could be tweaked, but I know how you like the look of your images, so I dont think it was a mistake as such, you dont like crayon drawings. I like it anyway 
Take a look at my deep Helix for example 
