Sombrero Reprocess - When Less Is More

[Stephane]

Hi all,

I've taken time to reprocess my Sombrero image from earlier this year. However, rather use my best 800 subs (from a total of 900), I chose to use my 360 best subs. I also drizzled this time and processed a little differently.

Overall, I am pleased as I believe I have gained a little resolution, perhaps at the expense of a less clean background. New image on the left; original image on the right. What do you think? Is it worth sacrificing over a dozen hours of subs just to select the very best ones? I believe in this case it is.

Please feel free to comment. Constructive criticism welcome.

Bigger version here.

Hope y'all enjoy. Clear skies.
Stephane

______

Integration: 360 x 120s = 12h at f/4
Capture location: Melbourne, Bortle 6.

[Mickoid (Michael)]

I think your comparison has proven your point in a most convincing way! Well worth the reprocess.

[Dave882 (David)]

Yep I agree- with targets like this that display a good deal of fine detail it is very much worth being picky. A btw that’s a cracking image!!

[gregbradley]

That was very successful.
I like that knot in the dust ring in the far right.

Greg

[Stephane]

Thanks for the comments guys. A bright target like the Sombrero can certainly benefit from selecting only the best subs. Maybe this year I can get more time on it and be even more picky. Will be interesting to see how far I can go with this.

[ChrisV (Chris)]

Very nice indeed. So is the difference due to drizzling or sub selection?

[Stephane]

Originally Posted by ChrisV

Very nice indeed. So is the difference due to drizzling or sub selection?

That’s a good question. I’d need to experiment further, but I think both have contributed differently. Had I not drizzled, the improved resolution may have been hidden by pixilation. The “knot” that Greg mentioned is a good example clearly better resolved thanks to a pickier selection of subs. Without drizzle though, it may have appeared pixilated.

[Leo.G (Leo)]

Wow, that's beautiful!