Whoa, that's excellent Greg as it shows where amateurs are going now that professionals just can't ie going long, deep and wide to show what hasn't been seen before. Really nice mosaic.
greg the right hand side looks a little clipped or too darkened and you can see there is more data there? Lots of stuff there in that shot
I did the mosaic manually. PSCS4 is the go. I have it but I didn't use it here. It may help with it. I'll have another go at the blend.
Quote:
Originally Posted by allan gould
Whoa, that's excellent Greg as it shows where amateurs are going now that professionals just can't ie going long, deep and wide to show what hasn't been seen before. Really nice mosaic.
Cheers mate.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hagar
Nice Greg. Just something wrong. It looks a little flat. The red is all the one tone and the black well it's very black.
Sorry Mate.
It'd be the 2nd panel. Oh well, plenty of repro data here!
Quote:
Originally Posted by Octane
Greg,
This needs rework -- I know you can do much better.
The right hand side is clipping in the red, I reckon. Maybe try another combination of hydrogen alpha and luminance?
If you can sort those things out, this is going to be a cracker!
H
Perhaps it is. It is also 1 hour of Ha whereas the 1st is 2 hours. I wonder if that really makes that much of a difference. It didn't seem to in the images. I think PSCS4 will help and I probably need to do the joining of the 2 panels at an early stage and then process it as one image rather than 2 then joined.
Stay tuned. It may take a coupla days. But I agree the data is very good.
Loads of details in the second panel there. I agree with most. It looks a bit posterized. That happens when you scale/normalise one panel to another one and end up with negative values in the lower end of the histogram. It looks like color clipping but in fact you clip your dynamic range. Better to stretch to lighter and more noise than the other way. Use PS for blending the finals but register them with registar. PS is hopeless at aligning. It's not designed for that. Illustrator which is vectorised does a better job but PS because it has to sample as it's pixel based will always interpolate and make a mess out of things.
Loads of details in the second panel there. I agree with most. It looks a bit posterized. That happens when you scale/normalise one panel to another one and end up with negative values in the lower end of the histogram. It looks like color clipping but in fact you clip your dynamic range. Better to stretch to lighter and more noise than the other way. Use PS for blending the finals but register them with registar. PS is hopeless at aligning. It's not designed for that. Illustrator which is vectorised does a better job but PS because it has to sample as it's pixel based will always interpolate and make a mess out of things.
Hi Marc,
I don't think I scaled one to the other particularly beyond levels/curves and it probably occurred in the processing of the 2nd panel before stitching. I think it occurred from a layer using overlay mode.
I took another 3 or 4 hours of panel 2 last night so I will redo it fully and see how it comes out now. Plus I'll use CS4 as it does a good job at stitching.
Hi Greg...
First and foremost, the thing that caught my eye when the largest image loaded on my page was the excellent 3 D effect. The thing sits nicely off the page.. I tended to reduce the size of the image so it showed all of it on my 24" mon. sitting in a dark room.
So I'm going along with Mikes sentiment that I too think the contrast does work.
Perhaps, it could be a wee bit dark in a few areas, but you could always go with the best of both worlds via layering, keeping the heavy contrast in places (especially along the wall, disapating out to the extremities) to retain the 3 D appeal.
Thanks Mike. I got another 3 hours or so of data so I'll be having another go at this one. I can't say I have Mosaics down pat yet. So if it catches people's eye then that is good to know I still need to get my procedures for mosaics down pat.
I got my Pentax 67 lens adapter today so some serious widefield woose coming up!
Quote:
Originally Posted by richardo
Hi Greg...
First and foremost, the thing that caught my eye when the largest image loaded on my page was the excellent 3 D effect. No ****e, the thing sits nicely off the page.. I tended to reduce the size of the image so it showed all of it on my 24" mon. sitting in a dark room.
So I'm going along with Mikes sentiment that I too think the contrast does work.
Good work I say!!
Rich
Cheers Rich. I'll see how it goes with the extra data. The Ha on panel 2 is spectacular yet when combined it was a bit ordinary so I need to get this fabulous Ha image showing through more of the twisty tendrils.
I also imaged a deep 6 filter version of NGC6164. I've probably gotten 35 hours of images in the last week,.
I also imaged a deep 6 filter version of NGC6164. I've probably gotten 35 hours of images in the last week,.
Greg.
...Man, you are an imaging machine . I got this much data on the Helix back in 09 but it took friggin a weeks worth of travelling back and forth over a month or so and it nearly killed me
...Man, you are an imaging machine . I got this much data on the Helix back in 09 but it took friggin a weeks worth of travelling back and forth over a month or so and it nearly killed me
Mike
True.
I am spoilt.
Its funny. Last Thurs night I was grumbling to myself having to setup my gear at my dark site (it takes all of 35 minutes!!). And I was thinking of how much effort you put into collecting your images.
Its funny. Last Thurs night I was grumbling to myself having to setup my gear at my dark site (it takes all of 35 minutes!!). And I was thinking of how much effort you put into collecting your images.
No substitute for exposure is there Greg! do you find after many repro's you can't decide on which you happiest with the most? anyway looking forward to seeing It.
There have been so many fantastic renditions of 6188 over the last month or so and this one promises to expand our impressions of it even more I expect. It certainly seems too dark and contrasty ATM but we may have been spoiled by the proliferation of great NB images that show extra "dimensions" for this object. It seems challenging to get a good compromise between natural and lots of detail.
Awaiting more data and repros with keen interest Greg
go the image scale 
...... 
