Ngc6559

[gregbradley]

Here is another NGC6559 I took recently.

AstroPhysics Riccardi Honders 305 F3.8 and QHY600m.

A tough one to process. For some reason the posted image is less vibrant than the one on my screen in Photoshop. I don't normally see a difference.

https://pbase.com/gregbradley/image/171970798/large regular size

https://pbase.com/gregbradley/image/171970798/original large size.


Greg.

[PKay (Peter)]

Superb image Greg.

Nice and vibrant and lovely 3 dimensional detail.

Very well done

[gregbradley]

Originally Posted by PKay

Superb image Greg.

Nice and vibrant and lovely 3 dimensional detail.

Very well done

Thanks Peter. It was a lot of trial and error to get it to that point. Some images fall in your lap and others you have to work for.

Greg.

[vlazg (George)]

Fantastic image Greg, one of my favourite areas.

[Ryderscope (Rodney)]

The posted image looks very vibrant to me Greg. Nice work.

[gregbradley]

Originally Posted by vlazg

Fantastic image Greg, one of my favourite areas.

Thanks very much for the compliment.

Originally Posted by Ryderscope

The posted image looks very vibrant to me Greg. Nice work.

Looking at it again yes it does.

Greg.

[multiweb (Marc)]

Nice image scale and resolution on that one Greg. You've got some nice details in the fine features.

[gregbradley]

Originally Posted by multiweb

Nice image scale and resolution on that one Greg. You've got some nice details in the fine features.

Thanks Marc. Its bit of a hard one. Marcus Davies rendition is probably the gold standard.

Greg.

[multiweb (Marc)]

Originally Posted by gregbradley

Thanks Marc. Its bit of a hard one. Marcus Davies rendition is probably the gold standard.

Greg.

Just had a look. He has more integration time but you're holding your liquor.

[gregbradley]

Originally Posted by multiweb

Just had a look. He has more integration time but you're holding your liquor.

Hehe, thanks Marc.

Greg.

[Andy01 (Andy)]

Hi Greg, You know I really respect your imaging, but - I've been biting my tongue on this one for a while, but I figured you might appreciate some honest feedback for what it's worth.

It's very magenta/purple and there's no clear definition between the blue reflection neb and the Ha emissions.

Stars are blown out and have next to no colour.

The details and shock fronts do not appear to be very sharp.

So I could do the usual thing and say something nice, then say what I really want to say etc, (but it's been 8 weeks of lockdown here too now, so maybe my usual warm fuzzy diplomacy is wearing a tad thin) - so I'll apologise in advance if these comments are in any way offensive, and as mentioned above - suggest that you compare yours to Marcus' and take it from there.

[multiweb (Marc)]

Originally Posted by Andy01

Hi Greg, You know I really respect your imaging, but - I've been biting my tongue on this one for a while, but I figured you might appreciate some honest feedback for what it's worth.

It's very magenta/purple and there's no clear definition between the blue reflection neb and the Ha emissions.

Stars are blown out and have next to no colour.

The details and shock fronts do not appear to be very sharp.

So I could do the usual thing and say something nice, then say what I really want to say etc, (but it's been 8 weeks of lockdown here too now, so maybe my usual warm fuzzy diplomacy is wearing a tad thin) - so I'll apologise in advance if these comments are in any way offensive, and as mentioned above - suggest that you compare yours to Marcus' and take it from there.

I have to disagree with this assessment. There is a difference in the integration time and SNR. Bright stars are larger than Marcus's version but the smaller ones are much finer and more defined in the background. Likely due to transparency at the time of capture. The shock fronts are exactly the same in both images with an excellent level of details.. They are sharp and detailed where they should be and diffuse in other parts. Greg's rendition is a little noisier but it is to be expected and he presented a truthful view of the object.

[gregbradley]

Originally Posted by Andy01

Hi Greg, You know I really respect your imaging, but - I've been biting my tongue on this one for a while, but I figured you might appreciate some honest feedback for what it's worth. No problem, I am not "precious".

It's very magenta/purple and there's no clear definition between the blue reflection neb and the Ha emissions. Yes it is quite purply, I set the Ha as usual but its come out too purple. I scaled that back.

Stars are blown out and have next to no colour. Stars are good now. Must have been some step that blew some of them out.

The details and shock fronts do not appear to be very sharp.

They could be sharper, I've sharpened it up a bit. I also have an AP130 image of the same that is very sharp.

So I could do the usual thing and say something nice, then say what I really want to say etc, (but it's been 8 weeks of lockdown here too now, so maybe my usual warm fuzzy diplomacy is wearing a tad thin) - so I'll apologise in advance if these comments are in any way offensive, and as mentioned above - suggest that you compare yours to Marcus' and take it from there.

All good Andy.

Originally Posted by multiweb

I have to disagree with this assessment. There is a difference in the integration time and SNR. Bright stars are larger than Marcus's version but the smaller ones are much finer and more defined in the background. Likely due to transparency at the time of capture. The shock fronts are exactly the same in both images with an excellent level of details.. They are sharp and detailed where they should be and diffuse in other parts. Greg's rendition is a little noisier but it is to be expected and he presented a truthful view of the object.

Cheers Marc.

https://pbase.com/gregbradley/image/171970798/large regular size

https://pbase.com/gregbradley/image/171970798/original large size.

This is the AP130 image which I personally prefer:

https://pbase.com/gregbradley/image/171965211/large regular size

https://pbase.com/gregbradley/image/171965211/original large size.

Greg.