Jump to content

  •  

CNers have asked about a donation box for Cloudy Nights over the years, so here you go. Donation is not required by any means, so please enjoy your stay.

Photo

NGC-281 Feedback and Files

  • Please log in to reply
13 replies to this topic

#1 Deesk06

Deesk06

    Viking 1

  • -----
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 671
  • Joined: 25 Jul 2015
  • Loc: New Jersey

Posted 28 November 2020 - 03:07 PM

I have been trying to work on this data for almost two weeks now. No matter what I do I cannot get a pleasing result, although this is probably the best of my most recent attempts. Feedback is much appreciated and needed. 

 

147 x 300" Ha

140 x 300" OIII

100 x 300" SII

 

Linear Processing: 

- Dynamic PSF/external PSF 

- Linear Fit (not sure I needed this, but I followed RGA MPI book)

- TGV Denoise (I didnt see much of a difference, could probably make it stronger)

 

Non-Linear

- Histogram transformation Stretch

- Color mask for saturation 

- Morphological transformation w/ starmask for star reduction

 

Photoshop

- Contrast

- Saturation 

- Final sharpening and noise reduction

- Final crop

 

 

here is the data if anyone else would like to try: 
https://drive.google...2ho?usp=sharing

get.jpg?insecure


Edited by Deesk06, 28 November 2020 - 03:18 PM.

  • Joe F Gafford, havasman, pgs/sdg and 4 others like this

#2 Dynan

Dynan

    Aurora

  • *****
  • Vendors
  • Posts: 4,822
  • Joined: 11 Mar 2018
  • Loc: NOLA

Posted 28 November 2020 - 03:15 PM

Looks great to me!


  • havasman and Deesk06 like this

#3 ryanha

ryanha

    Viking 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 632
  • Joined: 05 Aug 2020

Posted 28 November 2020 - 04:21 PM

I have been trying to work on this data for almost two weeks now. No matter what I do I cannot get a pleasing result

FALSE!  This is a pleasing result smile.gif Seriously, this is beautiful.  I love the color and it looks like you have some nice detail.

 

I have found that different people focus on different things. Is there an example image of this target that you are trying to emulate?  Or is there some specific aspect that you are not happy with?  (e.g. color, contrast, star size, star color, sharpness, framing?)

 

--Ryan


Edited by ryanha, 28 November 2020 - 04:22 PM.

  • Deesk06 likes this

#4 Deesk06

Deesk06

    Viking 1

  • -----
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 671
  • Joined: 25 Jul 2015
  • Loc: New Jersey

Posted 28 November 2020 - 05:06 PM

FALSE!  This is a pleasing result smile.gif Seriously, this is beautiful.  I love the color and it looks like you have some nice detail.

 

I have found that different people focus on different things. Is there an example image of this target that you are trying to emulate?  Or is there some specific aspect that you are not happy with?  (e.g. color, contrast, star size, star color, sharpness, framing?)

 

--Ryan

Thanks for thinking otherwise! I appreciate it.

 

I find all of my images to be very "washed out" and I don't like it. I find that increasing contrast and saturation makes it look a bit weird. Some people get great deep results with much less time and I am not sure how to make my images "pop" more with better colors. 


Edited by Deesk06, 28 November 2020 - 05:07 PM.


#5 dhaval

dhaval

    Vendor

  • *****
  • Vendors
  • Posts: 2,120
  • Joined: 21 Jul 2008
  • Loc: Round Rock, TX

Posted 28 November 2020 - 05:15 PM

I think this is a great result, but if you want to make it better, I'd say get some sharpening going on the image. You should be able to get a 3D feel with that. 

CS!


  • Deesk06 likes this

#6 ryanha

ryanha

    Viking 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 632
  • Joined: 05 Aug 2020

Posted 28 November 2020 - 05:33 PM

I find all of my images to be very "washed out" and I don't like it. I find that increasing contrast and saturation makes it look a bit weird. Some people get great deep results with much less time and I am not sure how to make my images "pop" more with better colors. 

Can you send a link to an example of an image that you think "pops" more?

 

Not trying to be argumentative, just want to understand better.

 

--Ryan



#7 imtl

imtl

    Vanguard

  • *****
  • Moderators
  • Posts: 2,049
  • Joined: 07 Jun 2016
  • Loc: On earth

Posted 28 November 2020 - 05:46 PM

Hi,

 

A few thoughts,

 

1. You have more than 32 hours of data. Maybe don't do deconvolution and NR? You're data should be nicely clean as a minimum at this stage. If I look at the stars and background, there are some artifacts and its too flat. So, cut back on that?

 

2. I think you got a really beautiful tone map. I don't know what you aimed for so maybe a bit more information is needed on that.

 

3. Good thing about NB imaging is that once you collect enough data your playing options are basically infinite. Just don't drive yourself crazy with it. I think, at least for me, that 3D feeling comes from sharpness, diverse tone map and background (chromatic/details) noise under control. No need to eliminate the last completely. Just tame it down. The best way is through more integration but obviously there is also personal preference on how much time to spend on an object.

 

3.a. Your stars look a bit lifeless. Maybe a bit too much MT? Its really not bad or anything, just need a bit of boost back to my taste.

 

My take on your image is, that it looks great and I like it. Would I tweak it differently? Of course, but that's the whole point of AP, we each have a different take on things. So, I would not force an imitation of other images of this object and just focus on your take.

 

Thanks for sharing!


  • Deesk06 likes this

#8 Deesk06

Deesk06

    Viking 1

  • -----
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 671
  • Joined: 25 Jul 2015
  • Loc: New Jersey

Posted 29 November 2020 - 04:11 PM

Thanks everyone! Thanks IMTL. I did changed it up a bit and I like this edit better. I need to do less MT as well. 

 

get.jpg?insecure



#9 imtl

imtl

    Vanguard

  • *****
  • Moderators
  • Posts: 2,049
  • Joined: 07 Jun 2016
  • Loc: On earth

Posted 29 November 2020 - 05:58 PM

Daniel (now I recognize your name from Abin :) ),

 

I agree I like it better. A few more stuff to try, run a LHE on this. I will boost up your dark/gray filaments and just give your nebula more life. Play with the parameters a bit. Maybe 25% mix?

Here is an example of what I did last night to show you what's possible with your image as well.

 

You should do a star mask and fix the magenta colors on your stars. Its not too bad bit is noticeable.

 

Great progress!


  • Deesk06 likes this

#10 Deesk06

Deesk06

    Viking 1

  • -----
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 671
  • Joined: 25 Jul 2015
  • Loc: New Jersey

Posted 29 November 2020 - 07:15 PM



Daniel (now I recognize your name from Abin smile.gif ),

 

I agree I like it better. A few more stuff to try, run a LHE on this. I will boost up your dark/gray filaments and just give your nebula more life. Play with the parameters a bit. Maybe 25% mix?

Here is an example of what I did last night to show you what's possible with your image as well.

 

You should do a star mask and fix the magenta colors on your stars. Its not too bad bit is noticeable.

 

Great progress!

Glad you recognize me now! lol! 

 

I did a 25% mix and I like how it came out! Maybe I could have went to 20%! Thanks for the tip! I brought some more depth to it!

get.jpg?insecure



#11 imtl

imtl

    Vanguard

  • *****
  • Moderators
  • Posts: 2,049
  • Joined: 07 Jun 2016
  • Loc: On earth

Posted 29 November 2020 - 07:34 PM

So nice! Definitely more depth. I think you can even squeeze more out of it if you play with the kernel radius a bit.

 

(stars are still purple!)

 

Great image. Very happy for you.


  • Deesk06 likes this

#12 Deesk06

Deesk06

    Viking 1

  • -----
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 671
  • Joined: 25 Jul 2015
  • Loc: New Jersey

Posted 29 November 2020 - 09:19 PM

So nice! Definitely more depth. I think you can even squeeze more out of it if you play with the kernel radius a bit.

 

(stars are still purple!)

 

Great image. Very happy for you.

I played around with kernel size(edit: raidus)! I was able to squeeze a bit more out as you said. Thanks for the tips! I personally have mo idea how to effectively use star net and then bring the stars back into the image. It's something I have never gotten right. There have always been a lot of artifacts. I really do like how people do get small stars with it though. Something I would love to learn to do correctly and effectively. 


Edited by Deesk06, 29 November 2020 - 09:21 PM.


#13 imtl

imtl

    Vanguard

  • *****
  • Moderators
  • Posts: 2,049
  • Joined: 07 Jun 2016
  • Loc: On earth

Posted 29 November 2020 - 10:28 PM

I played around with kernel size(edit: raidus)! I was able to squeeze a bit more out as you said. Thanks for the tips! I personally have mo idea how to effectively use star net and then bring the stars back into the image. It's something I have never gotten right. There have always been a lot of artifacts. I really do like how people do get small stars with it though. Something I would love to learn to do correctly and effectively.


I'll pm you with some tips.

#14 MHamburg

MHamburg

    Vanguard

  • *****
  • Posts: 2,234
  • Joined: 21 Jun 2006
  • Loc: Brooklyn, NY/Berkshires, MA

Posted 30 November 2020 - 11:40 AM

Still after all a glorious image! One could mistake it for a Hubble image.

 

Michael




CNers have asked about a donation box for Cloudy Nights over the years, so here you go. Donation is not required by any means, so please enjoy your stay.


Recent Topics






Cloudy Nights LLC
Cloudy Nights Sponsor: Astronomics