cclark
member
Reged: 07/29/08
|
Re: Help with M42?
[Re: Intensity2x]
#5651063 - 01/29/13 08:03 PM
|
Edit
|
Reply
|
Quote |
Quick Reply
|
|
|
Much better. Great job!
|
Nils_Lars
Postmaster
Reged: 01/04/08
Loc: Santa Cruz Mountains , CA
|
Re: Help with M42?
[Re: cclark]
#5651329 - 01/29/13 10:52 PM
|
|
Edit
|
Reply
|
Quote |
Quick Reply
|
|
|
That came out great , usually takes a lot longer to improve that much.
|
zerro1
Postmaster
Reged: 08/02/09
Loc: Smokey Point , 48.12°N 122.25°...
|
Re: Help with M42?
[Re: Intensity2x]
#5651428 - 01/29/13 11:56 PM
|
|
Edit
|
Reply
|
Quote |
Quick Reply
|
|
|
Quote:
there's kind of a weird, square gradient in the picture that i was not able to remove. i have seen this before but i'm not sure what causes it.
If you're talking about an artifact that presents as almost a frame; more prominent on the left and bottom... I've experienced this on my Canon XS. it's there with or without flats, with or without darks. I've not spent much time trying to solve it because the rare clear sky has been to valuable to waste troubleshooting. I never used to encounter this issue so troubleshooting will entail eliminating software and just using a timer/remote shutter. It could be related to controling via USB? , maybe a bad USB? shutter shadow?
|
Intensity2x
super member
Reged: 09/06/11
Loc: Northern NJ
|
Re: Help with M42?
[Re: zerro1]
#5651909 - 01/30/13 09:42 AM
|
|
Edit
|
Reply
|
Quote |
Quick Reply
|
|
|
Yep, thats what we are seeing. This is the first time I have seen it in any of my shots. I have changed neither my equipment nor my technique, as far as I know.
|
jsines
super member
Reged: 09/06/11
Loc: Berkley. Michigan
|
Re: Help with M42?
[Re: Intensity2x]
#5652395 - 01/30/13 01:56 PM
|
|
Edit
|
Reply
|
Quote |
Quick Reply
|
|
|
That looks much better! Good job!
|
Intensity2x
super member
Reged: 09/06/11
Loc: Northern NJ
|
Re: Help with M42?
[Re: jsines]
#5653281 - 01/30/13 09:54 PM
|
|
Edit
|
Reply
|
Quote |
Quick Reply
|
|
|
Processing can really drive a man insane! I'm calling this one my final answer, err... image. Locking it in. Yep.
All of your's are still better I think, but I'm happy with what I got. I'll be revisiting this one, hopefully from darker skies, but I think I learned a lot here. Thanks for everyone's help!
|
Driven1
super member
Reged: 08/19/10
Loc: N. Central PA near CSSP
|
Re: Help with M42?
[Re: Intensity2x]
#5653360 - 01/30/13 10:38 PM Attachment (8 downloads)
|
|
Edit
|
Reply
|
Quote |
Quick Reply
|
|
|
Just another take on it using Startools.
|
PaulEK
sage
Reged: 05/25/08
Loc: Wisconsin
|
Re: Help with M42?
[Re: Driven1]
#5658423 - 02/02/13 04:09 PM Attachment (6 downloads)
|
|
Edit
|
Reply
|
Quote |
Quick Reply
|
|
|
I took Neil's re-processing and played with it in the only version of Photoshop I currently have: Elements 6.0. I used the despeckling filter because the dust looked a little grainy, I played with lighting: 'shadows/highlights', 'brightness/contrast', and 'levels'. I also upped the saturation in colors. I just played with it in the same way I do with daytime shots. I don't have any hard and fast rules; I just tweak one thing and then another until it looks good to me. Everyone's idea of what looks good is different (I thought some of the other attempts were too overdone, but that's just me.) I think upping the saturation may not look 'real' (our eyes cannot see any of this, so what is real?), but it brings out detail.
|
jerry10137
member
Reged: 01/26/13
Loc: Texas, USA
|
Re: Help with M42?
[Re: PaulEK]
#5658494 - 02/02/13 04:52 PM
|
|
Edit
|
Reply
|
Quote |
Quick Reply
|
|
|
Please pardon my lack of knowledge using DSLR methods. I have a few questions.
To get the original image, is your cannon camera using a telephoto lens on piggyback? Attached to the focuser non magnified or magnified from an eyepiece to the camera? Sorry if this is an oddball question as I'm pretty new at the photography. Thanks in advance.
|
pfile
Carpal Tunnel
Reged: 06/14/09
|
Re: Help with M42?
[Re: jerry10137]
#5659034 - 02/02/13 10:30 PM
|
|
Edit
|
Reply
|
Quote |
Quick Reply
|
|
|
hi - it's prime focus photography. the telescope is acting like a (really long focal length) fixed prime lens. no eyepiece, no piggyback. the camera is directly attached to the telescope.
|
Previous
Index
Next
Threaded
