Jump to content


Photo

NexStar AP Graduates Images and Discussions

  • Please log in to reply
2693 replies to this topic

#2001 hopskipson

hopskipson

    Apollo

  • *****
  • Posts: 1216
  • Joined: 24 Jun 2010
  • Loc: Queens, New Yawk, Light pollution Headquarters!

Posted 07 April 2013 - 05:49 PM

Let me try again

Attached Files



#2002 hopskipson

hopskipson

    Apollo

  • *****
  • Posts: 1216
  • Joined: 24 Jun 2010
  • Loc: Queens, New Yawk, Light pollution Headquarters!

Posted 07 April 2013 - 05:49 PM

#2

Attached Files



#2003 Tel

Tel

    Cosmos

  • *****
  • Posts: 9103
  • Joined: 31 Mar 2006
  • Loc: Wallingford England

Posted 07 April 2013 - 07:52 PM

" One thing I have learned though, is that ca. 95% of the quality of the final image lies in the processing !"

But (I think you once said) without good data there are no good quality images. And I agree with both of your statements!

I'm glad I'm not the only one who subscribes to the "if it improves the image it stays and if not just hit undo" methodology. To that end I have 2 more Saturn images from this morning I hope you like if not just reprocces to your liking :roflmao:


Hi James,

I say a lot of things, most of which ........ well, just ask my wife ! :idea:

But yes, you're quite right, if the data's not there in the capture then one's on a hiding to nothing trying to process it ! Such in fact was the case with my "Sunflower". I tried to get something from the 2 minute exposures but there really was very little to be had. Conversely the 5 minute subs had something to offer although they too were rather poor with an oval appearance to many of the background stars. (See attached single 5 minute sub).

Congratulations also on that fine shot of Saturn ! :bow::bow:

Try however messing with it a little further, I'm sure you'll see what I mean with regard to quality being mainly in the (never ending) processing to the point where it almost becomes an obsession to wring out the last little detail ! :waytogo:

Best regards,
Tel

Attached Files



#2004 Greyhaven

Greyhaven

    Surveyor 1

  • *****
  • Moderators
  • Posts: 1861
  • Joined: 11 May 2004
  • Loc: 16 miles south of the Buckfield Mall

Posted 08 April 2013 - 06:52 PM

Thanks Tel, I agree with you about the results of ones' processing only have to please the photographer. I am amazed at how open and encouraging to us in our attempts you are.
Thanks
Grey

#2005 Tel

Tel

    Cosmos

  • *****
  • Posts: 9103
  • Joined: 31 Mar 2006
  • Loc: Wallingford England

Posted 09 April 2013 - 04:39 AM

Very many thanks for your kind words and comments, Grey.:bow::bow:

I do try to dispel any myths, (particularly where I'm concerned0), that imaging is something that is beyond most people's capability because it definitely is not !

It is of course important to build up a "tool-kit" with which to carry it out, but this can be done as and when (if) the interest develops and, naturally, as spare cash becomes available.

Even then disappointment and frustration are rife ! The number of failed attempts I've made and continue to make are legion, but just occasionally, one comes through which once again "ups" my flagging enthusiasm level and drives me on to continue.

Hardware aside though, I think overall, that my best tools are contained in my processing software for without that, I would not be able to apply all the "fiddle factors" I do to the often poor data I collect !

Personally, I use Stark Lab. "Nebulosity 2" to capture, stack and process my DSOs, (it supports, my Meade DSI CCD, my Atik 314L+ CCD and my Canon 350D DSLR cameras). My main processing tool however, is Photoshop CS2.

For planetary and lunar work; a simple Philips webcam (SPC900NC) is supported by Stark Lab. "Craterlet" and Registax 6.

The rest is just practice; which is why I'm so grateful to the lads here for alowing me to "get some in" with their images. If I were dependent on our English skies ......... :4

Best regards,
Tel

#2006 Tel

Tel

    Cosmos

  • *****
  • Posts: 9103
  • Joined: 31 Mar 2006
  • Loc: Wallingford England

Posted 09 April 2013 - 04:47 AM

Hi Tel, Great Sunflower! :bow: On my monitor I see quite a bit of noise around the object. Here's a question: I see you did 10 subs at 5 min per. Would the noise problem be solved by many more subs and perhaps shorter exposures per sub? Better signal to noise ratio? Or would that make any difference? Not offering advice; just sincerely asking questions of someone with far more experience than me. :confused:



Hi Skip,

Any better ?

Noting what you said, it absolutely amazes me that I don't always spot this kind of "noise" before placing the image in front of you folks !

I could blame the "jpeg compression", but I know you'd "smell" that one coming a mile off ! :rofl2:

Best regards,
Tel

Attached Files



#2007 Peter9

Peter9

    Aurora

  • *****
  • Posts: 4719
  • Joined: 30 Oct 2008
  • Loc: Yorkshire - Born & Bred

Posted 09 April 2013 - 05:49 AM

Skip's our A.P hound. He can sniff out a noisy star a million light years away. :rofl5:

My aging eye thought the original image was good, thats until I saw, throu Skip's prompting and your own expertise, your second and much improved image.

What a team. :bow: :bow: :grin:

Regards. Peter.

#2008 Tel

Tel

    Cosmos

  • *****
  • Posts: 9103
  • Joined: 31 Mar 2006
  • Loc: Wallingford England

Posted 09 April 2013 - 06:13 AM

Many thanks, Peter ! :bow::bow:

But see what I mean ? I've just noticed that in reprocessing a little to diminish the "noise", the background stars are now a little duller !

Try this one ! :rofl2:

Best regards,
Tel

Attached Files



#2009 Peter9

Peter9

    Aurora

  • *****
  • Posts: 4719
  • Joined: 30 Oct 2008
  • Loc: Yorkshire - Born & Bred

Posted 09 April 2013 - 06:30 AM

:funny:

Now thats funny right there. :bow: :bow:

I'm not commenting on your third attempt as I dread to think what may follow. :shameonyou: :roflmao:

Thanks for the belly laugh you silly so and so. :applause:

Regards. Peter.

#2010 Skip

Skip

    Starlifter Driver

  • *****
  • Posts: 3940
  • Joined: 23 Jan 2008
  • Loc: Fort Worth, Texas, USA

Posted 09 April 2013 - 11:32 AM

You guys are hilarious! :grin: I too think the last one is a big improvement! :waytogo: :bow:

#2011 Tel

Tel

    Cosmos

  • *****
  • Posts: 9103
  • Joined: 31 Mar 2006
  • Loc: Wallingford England

Posted 09 April 2013 - 01:05 PM

" One thing I have learned though, is that ca. 95% of the quality of the final image lies in the processing !"

But (I think you once said) without good data there are no good quality images. And I agree with both of your statements!

I'm glad I'm not the only one who subscribes to the "if it improves the image it stays and if not just hit undo" methodology. To that end I have 2 more Saturn images from this morning I hope you like if not just reprocces to your liking :roflmao:


Hi James,


I liked this recent Saturn image of yours very much ! :bow::bow: There's a lot of useful data in there with which to "play". :waytogo:

So, as always, in thanking you very much for your kind invitation to try to take the processing a little further; after five attempts I've managed this rendition. However, I'm thinking there may still be more to pull out of this one ! What d'you think ? :idea:

Best regards,
Tel

Attached Files



#2012 Tel

Tel

    Cosmos

  • *****
  • Posts: 9103
  • Joined: 31 Mar 2006
  • Loc: Wallingford England

Posted 09 April 2013 - 01:34 PM

You guys are hilarious! :grin: I too think the last one is a big improvement! :waytogo: :bow:


Grateful thanks, Skip ! :bow::bow:

Best regards,
Tel

#2013 hopskipson

hopskipson

    Apollo

  • *****
  • Posts: 1216
  • Joined: 24 Jun 2010
  • Loc: Queens, New Yawk, Light pollution Headquarters!

Posted 09 April 2013 - 07:32 PM

Tel once again you worked some magic and made my eh image into a smashing good picture, :bow:bravo :bow:! Is there a way I could send the video and you take it from there document what you did so I can learn. With 4 little ones in the house I barely have time to capture images let alone learn the proccessing in my limited time, although I try :lol:,

#2014 Tel

Tel

    Cosmos

  • *****
  • Posts: 9103
  • Joined: 31 Mar 2006
  • Loc: Wallingford England

Posted 10 April 2013 - 05:08 AM

Hi Janes,

I don't know how you might get the video to me but to be honest, I don't think I could do a better job with it than you have already done and published. All I have done here, (at your kind invitation to do so), is to apply a few P/Shop (CS2) features plus a little "fiddling" !

In essence, I only applied the feature "Auto Levels" which brightened the above image #2, giving it, however, (in my opinion), too much of an overall blue-ness to it; particulary with regard to the ring structure. Also, it presented a potential danger of over-contrasting the creamy yellow central area.

I therefore just reduced the contrast a little to prevent this and then turned my attention to the excessive blueness of the rings.

Here I used the "Zoom" to increase the image size and thus make the work easier, and then the "Lasso" tool to draw around the inner ring section: (much easier to keep a steady hand on a zoomed image) !

So, having now isolated the inner portion of the ring from the rest of the image, I merely desaturated its blue colour and then used a combination of "Levels" and "Brightness and Contrast" to "whiten" it !

And that's all I did ! It looked good enough to me so I re-published it based on my judgement that the original capture, stacking and processing had produced an entirely satisfactory image which only required a minor amount of further "tweaking" or to some, perhaps a little "cheating" ?

The latter of course relates to individual opinion but as far as I'm concerned, I don't care what technique it takes so long as the end result mimics that which is acceptably recognised as a reproduction of the subject matter and is pleasing to the eye !

Does this help ?

Best regards,
Tel

#2015 hopskipson

hopskipson

    Apollo

  • *****
  • Posts: 1216
  • Joined: 24 Jun 2010
  • Loc: Queens, New Yawk, Light pollution Headquarters!

Posted 10 April 2013 - 06:06 AM

Tel- Yes that helps alot! I was afraid to use the lasso tool with my unsteady hamd. So zoom then lasso, got to try it. Thanks for the tip.

#2016 Tel

Tel

    Cosmos

  • *****
  • Posts: 9103
  • Joined: 31 Mar 2006
  • Loc: Wallingford England

Posted 10 April 2013 - 06:58 AM

Hi James,

Recommended Flow Chart Sequence.

1) "Zoom".

2) Take a drop of the "Hard Stuff".

3) Wait. (Recommend five minutes for 2) to take effect).

4) Check outstretched hand for shakes.

5) If shakes prevail, refer to 3).

6) Check outstretched hand for continuing shakes.

7) If shakes still prevail, this time, refer to 2)

8) Wait. (Recommend five minutes for 2) to take effect).

9) Check outstretched hand for further signs of shakes.

10) If shakes still prevail, refer again, (and again) to 2) but give up processing for the rest of the day. Don't worry about the shakes !

11) If no shakes prevail after either stages, 4), 6) or 9), draw a steady handed lasso around ring area.

12) Resume normal image size.

13) Desaturate and "whiten" ring area.

Hoping this helps a little further ! :rofl2:!

Best regards,
Tel

(Pleased to help) ! :bow:

#2017 Peter9

Peter9

    Aurora

  • *****
  • Posts: 4719
  • Joined: 30 Oct 2008
  • Loc: Yorkshire - Born & Bred

Posted 10 April 2013 - 07:27 AM

:funny:

Wonderful Tel. Very funny.

It's surprising what a little falling down water can do. :roflmao:

Regards. Peter.

#2018 hopskipson

hopskipson

    Apollo

  • *****
  • Posts: 1216
  • Joined: 24 Jun 2010
  • Loc: Queens, New Yawk, Light pollution Headquarters!

Posted 10 April 2013 - 12:18 PM

Tel

If I listen to your advice I don't think I would have to worry too much. By step 11 all of my images would look just fine :bigshock:!

If I could still see them :rofl5:

#2019 haytor

haytor

    Apollo

  • -----
  • Posts: 1231
  • Joined: 29 Nov 2007
  • Loc: Smethwick near Birmingham UK.

Posted 11 April 2013 - 07:29 AM

Late again in keeping up with posts,

James, those are some decent Saturn captures, nice work, :waytogo:keep plugging away with the processing side, time and effort rewards us in the end,the learning curve is steep as i have found myself, in fact its a never ending learning curve as theres always something new to learn, keep at it and keep posting.

Tel, yep, second and third process of your M63 looks much better than the original, would like to see you capture this one with your Atik, firstly in mono, but then using your colour filters, i just have a feeling the result would show better detail using your more sensitive Atik mono CCD.

Thats a challenge Tel, prove me wrong, :roflmao:

Best regards as always,

Tom.

#2020 Tel

Tel

    Cosmos

  • *****
  • Posts: 9103
  • Joined: 31 Mar 2006
  • Loc: Wallingford England

Posted 11 April 2013 - 10:14 AM

Thanks Tom, for those kind words. :bow::bow:

I chose to use the DSLR rather than the Atik 314L+ for two main reasons.

Firstly, M63 fitted the "frame" better, (according to Ron Wodaski's New astronomy Calculator, which you know I use to estimate FOV), and secondly, because I wanted to try to obtain a colour image.

Now of course I could have potentially achieved this with the Atik, suitably IR blocked, plus RGB filters, (although my "blue" is a little "pale" compared to the blue filter colour density used -- Wratten Number Scale), but with M63 in its current celestial position, I doubt that with the 5 minutes per frame I found necessary and at each colour plus a "Lume", I'm not at all sure that it wouldn't have long disappeared over the rooftops before I'd finished imaging !

Equally so and based on recent "performance", d'you think our weather would "stay the distance" ? :idea:

That aside, some other target, better placed, may doubtlesssly give me a better chance from which to test out the monochrome Atik with colour filters.

Best regards,
Tel

#2021 haytor

haytor

    Apollo

  • -----
  • Posts: 1231
  • Joined: 29 Nov 2007
  • Loc: Smethwick near Birmingham UK.

Posted 11 April 2013 - 10:41 AM

Fully understand your reasons for using the DSLR Tel,i did wonder about the FOV if you had tried the Atik,and whether the image scale of M63 would be suitable or not to show fine detail,you have captured some detail within the spiral form of M63 with the DSLR, so nice job mate. :waytogo: :bow: :bow:

Also as you say, given the position of M63 and the limited time available to capture it, i can also understand the time it would take to collect enough data in each of LRGB using filters with the Atik.Weather and conditions of course, is our nemesis and continues to be so :bangbangbang:Good job then, that our dedication to this great hobby of ours over rides all the frustration :roflmao:

best regards,

Tom.

#2022 Uggbits

Uggbits

    Ranger 4

  • -----
  • Posts: 321
  • Joined: 28 Apr 2010

Posted 11 April 2013 - 12:42 PM

Fantastic work in here guys! Tel, I really like your attempts on the Sunflower and M51 (Two targets I recently had a crack at during a brief clear night).

This is 1h55m of 5 minute exposures of the Whirlpool Galaxy captured through a Meade 14" SCT at a focal length of 3.8m. The telescope was guided on Paramount ME and captured with a QSI 583c @ -20 degrees Celsius. This is likely my deepest image to date, as many of the points of light are in reality background galaxies. This target always interested me as it shows two merging galaxies. In this case I managed to capture the full bridge between the two which is something I have failed to do in past attempts at the target.

Attached Files



#2023 Seiko4169

Seiko4169

    Mariner 2

  • -----
  • Posts: 259
  • Joined: 04 Jul 2009

Posted 11 April 2013 - 01:34 PM

Fantastic work in here guys! Tel, I really like your attempts on the Sunflower and M51 (Two targets I recently had a crack at during a brief clear night).

This is 1h55m of 5 minute exposures of the Whirlpool Galaxy captured through a Meade 14" SCT at a focal length of 3.8m. The telescope was guided on Paramount ME and captured with a QSI 583c @ -20 degrees Celsius. This is likely my deepest image to date, as many of the points of light are in reality background galaxies. This target always interested me as it shows two merging galaxies. In this case I managed to capture the full bridge between the two which is something I have failed to do in past attempts at the target.



Sensational! :bow:

#2024 Maverick199

Maverick199

    Voyager 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 12522
  • Joined: 27 Feb 2011
  • Loc: India

Posted 12 April 2013 - 05:28 AM

Excellent Saturn James, much more detail than the one you posted in the Original Nexstar forum. :bow: As usual, Tel helps bringing out details and I might want to make a note of the 13 points he mentioned. :lol:

Uggs, excellent Sunflower, sort of makes the word stand out. :D

#2025 haytor

haytor

    Apollo

  • -----
  • Posts: 1231
  • Joined: 29 Nov 2007
  • Loc: Smethwick near Birmingham UK.

Posted 12 April 2013 - 05:35 AM

Stunning M51 Uggs, detail to the core which is nicely controlled.Love it :bow: :bow:

regards,

Tom.






Cloudy Nights LLC
Cloudy Nights Sponsor: Astronomics