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

Moon 18-2-21

  • Please log in to reply
23 replies to this topic

#1 JamesCook1971

JamesCook1971

    Lift Off

  • -----
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 17
  • Joined: 13 Jun 2020
  • Loc: Essex, UK

Posted 18 February 2021 - 06:38 PM

Mosaic of 14 tiles. GPCAM3-290M + 2x Barlow, Skywatcher 200p, EQ6. Captured with Sharpcap, stacked in AS3, processed in Astra Image (LR deconvolution), stitched in ICE, final tweaks in Photoshop (levels etc.). 

 

Clear but windy and cold, shooting over houses was a pain (lots of heat escaping the old Victorian houses along the street!) but I think conditions otherwise were very good and the moon was up over 50 degrees. I think this is probably about as good as it gets with a mass produced 8" newt!

 

Full resolution image here: https://www.astrobin...1971&real=&mod=  or via here if that link doesn't work: https://astrob.in/2l56cw/0/

Attached Thumbnails

  • 18-2-21 small.png

Edited by JamesCook1971, 19 February 2021 - 10:02 AM.

  • Kenny V., airscottdenning, John_Moore and 10 others like this

#2 ATL Gator

ATL Gator

    Vostok 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 107
  • Joined: 05 Jan 2021
  • Loc: Atlanta, Georgia, USA

Posted 18 February 2021 - 07:31 PM

Nice work. The full resolution image is stunning.


  • JamesCook1971 likes this

#3 Tom Glenn

Tom Glenn

    Gemini

  • -----
  • Posts: 3,293
  • Joined: 07 Feb 2018
  • Loc: San Diego, CA

Posted 18 February 2021 - 10:31 PM

It's a nice image, although I'm confused about how to see the full resolution version.  When I click on the link, the only version of the image I can get is 1824x2367, which is far below the listed resolution of 5520x7164.  This happens with many linked images from Astrobin (inability to see the full sized file), yet this only happens with some people's posts......many linked images from Astrobin do display at full resolution.  So why the discrepancy?


  • JamesCook1971 likes this

#4 JamesCook1971

JamesCook1971

    Lift Off

  • -----
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 17
  • Joined: 13 Jun 2020
  • Loc: Essex, UK

Posted 19 February 2021 - 02:33 AM

It's a nice image, although I'm confused about how to see the full resolution version. When I click on the link, the only version of the image I can get is 1824x2367, which is far below the listed resolution of 5520x7164. This happens with many linked images from Astrobin (inability to see the full sized file), yet this only happens with some people's posts......many linked images from Astrobin do display at full resolution. So why the discrepancy?


I suspect you are on the click and zoom version - left click on the image and it should zoom into full resolution. There should still be the full resolution button top right though.

#5 aeroman4907

aeroman4907

    Surveyor 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 1,528
  • Joined: 23 Nov 2017
  • Loc: Castle Rock, Colorado

Posted 19 February 2021 - 08:25 AM

I am having the same issue at Tom.  Left clicking on the image does nothing to go to full size view.  I tried going to the technical card and then back to the image, but again, no larger view is present.  There is also no full resolution image button on the top right either.

 

This issue might be random or some sort of setting in Astrobin.  I've been able to see many other images full size without any problems.


  • JamesCook1971 likes this

#6 Borodog

Borodog

    Surveyor 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 1,548
  • Joined: 26 Oct 2020

Posted 19 February 2021 - 08:33 AM

I agree with Tom; the only version I see is 1824x2367. It's tack sharp for that resolution, though. Nice work.


  • JamesCook1971 likes this

#7 JamesCook1971

JamesCook1971

    Lift Off

  • -----
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 17
  • Joined: 13 Jun 2020
  • Loc: Essex, UK

Posted 19 February 2021 - 10:00 AM

I agree with Tom; the only version I see is 1824x2367. It's tack sharp for that resolution, though. Nice work.

 

This goes to the image page - clicking on the image should give the full resolution option:  https://astrob.in/2l56cw/0/



#8 airscottdenning

airscottdenning

    Viking 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 533
  • Joined: 22 Aug 2008
  • Loc: Colorado

Posted 19 February 2021 - 10:02 AM

Stunning mosaic! Beautiful processing. Nice work!

 

Something's broken at AstroBin, but even the "fit window" version looks great.



#9 aeroman4907

aeroman4907

    Surveyor 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 1,528
  • Joined: 23 Nov 2017
  • Loc: Castle Rock, Colorado

Posted 19 February 2021 - 10:14 AM

This goes to the image page - clicking on the image should give the full resolution option:  https://astrob.in/2l56cw/0/

Unfortunately, that doesn't work either.  I am presuming you are not having issues on your end.  Regardless, it is a very nice image at the lower resolution, but I know it is very frustrating when you can have everyone enjoy the full size version.



#10 Borodog

Borodog

    Surveyor 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 1,548
  • Joined: 26 Oct 2020

Posted 19 February 2021 - 10:18 AM

Definitely seems to be astrobin:

Attached Thumbnails

  • Untitled.jpg


#11 aeroman4907

aeroman4907

    Surveyor 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 1,528
  • Joined: 23 Nov 2017
  • Loc: Castle Rock, Colorado

Posted 19 February 2021 - 10:23 AM

It might be an issue with one of your settings for presenting images.  I tested a few of your images on Astrobin and none of them display at full resolution (at least for the mosaics).  I found other similar images on Astrobin and had no problem seeing the larger image, although there were some posts where the larger version was not available (this seemed to be poster specific).



#12 JamesCook1971

JamesCook1971

    Lift Off

  • -----
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 17
  • Joined: 13 Jun 2020
  • Loc: Essex, UK

Posted 19 February 2021 - 12:06 PM

Hmmm, I'll have to do some poking around..... this looks right to me:

 

https://cdn.astrobin...2ae6fa7087c.png


  • aeroman4907 and Proton Flipper like this

#13 aeroman4907

aeroman4907

    Surveyor 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 1,528
  • Joined: 23 Nov 2017
  • Loc: Castle Rock, Colorado

Posted 19 February 2021 - 01:07 PM

Hmmm, I'll have to do some poking around..... this looks right to me:

 

https://cdn.astrobin...2ae6fa7087c.png

Well done James!  I can now view the full sized image.  A tad on the dark side and some noticeable gradients in the near blacks, but overall a very pleasing image.  Thanks for fixing for us to view full size!

 

Steve



#14 JamesCook1971

JamesCook1971

    Lift Off

  • -----
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 17
  • Joined: 13 Jun 2020
  • Loc: Essex, UK

Posted 19 February 2021 - 01:33 PM

Well done James!  I can now view the full sized image.  A tad on the dark side and some noticeable gradients in the near blacks, but overall a very pleasing image.  Thanks for fixing for us to view full size!

 

Steve

 

Yes - a bit on the dark side - trying to prevent too much clipping on the highlights but perhaps went a bit too far!



#15 wargrafix

wargrafix

    Fly Me to the Moon

  • *****
  • Posts: 5,040
  • Joined: 10 Apr 2013
  • Loc: Trinidad

Posted 19 February 2021 - 01:36 PM

That is proof that the moon is always a stunning target. Absolutely perfect!


  • JamesCook1971 likes this

#16 JamesCook1971

JamesCook1971

    Lift Off

  • -----
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 17
  • Joined: 13 Jun 2020
  • Loc: Essex, UK

Posted 19 February 2021 - 02:03 PM

Lacus Mortis & surroundings: Lacus Mortis et al 70pc.png



#17 JamesCook1971

JamesCook1971

    Lift Off

  • -----
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 17
  • Joined: 13 Jun 2020
  • Loc: Essex, UK

Posted 19 February 2021 - 02:04 PM

and the western side of Tranquility:

 

Tranquility 85pc.png


  • John_Moore and Proton Flipper like this

#18 Borodog

Borodog

    Surveyor 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 1,548
  • Joined: 26 Oct 2020

Posted 19 February 2021 - 05:27 PM

That's the ticket. Spectacular.



#19 Tom Glenn

Tom Glenn

    Gemini

  • -----
  • Posts: 3,293
  • Joined: 07 Feb 2018
  • Loc: San Diego, CA

Posted 19 February 2021 - 05:38 PM

There is definitely something weird going on with Astrobin and the way it makes full sized images available (or not, in this case).  But your direct link above to the png file works!  

 

Very nice image, with good detail throughout and pleasant processing!  My only editorial comments are 1) in your original post you said it was probably as good as it gets for a mass produced 8 inch scope.  This will be highly dependent on your local seeing conditions, and so maybe this is true for your location, but an 8 inch scope is far more capable than many realize, and there is plenty of room for increased resolution here, if only conditions and techniques allow it.  And 2) the issue of image darkness is simply personal preference, but if you are worried about clipping highlights, this is what gamma is for.  Increasing the gamma will raise the midtones without clipping highlights and will make the image look more realistic.  Your image is quite nice, my only comment in this regard is that considerable regions along the terminator show little to no detail (because very dark) in regions that actually are very well illuminated.  But this is certainly a tricky part of lunar imaging processing.  

 

Nice work! 


  • JamesCook1971 likes this

#20 JamesCook1971

JamesCook1971

    Lift Off

  • -----
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 17
  • Joined: 13 Jun 2020
  • Loc: Essex, UK

Posted 19 February 2021 - 07:42 PM

There is definitely something weird going on with Astrobin and the way it makes full sized images available (or not, in this case).  But your direct link above to the png file works!  

 

Very nice image, with good detail throughout and pleasant processing!  My only editorial comments are 1) in your original post you said it was probably as good as it gets for a mass produced 8 inch scope.  This will be highly dependent on your local seeing conditions, and so maybe this is true for your location, but an 8 inch scope is far more capable than many realize, and there is plenty of room for increased resolution here, if only conditions and techniques allow it.  And 2) the issue of image darkness is simply personal preference, but if you are worried about clipping highlights, this is what gamma is for.  Increasing the gamma will raise the midtones without clipping highlights and will make the image look more realistic.  Your image is quite nice, my only comment in this regard is that considerable regions along the terminator show little to no detail (because very dark) in regions that actually are very well illuminated.  But this is certainly a tricky part of lunar imaging processing.  

 

Nice work! 

This is by no means the finished article, just playing around..

 

https://cdn.astrobin...34b92e33435.png

 

..but I have pushed the gamma a fair bit and I see what you mean about the additional detail along the terminator (although some of the extra detail is quite soft so I may have to revisit the processing in AS3!). This does bring out the gradients a bit more in the near black areas (Serenity) - I wonder if this is an ICE artefact as I dont it see it to the same extent in the single tile even when subject to the same adjustments in Photoshop (and these are 12 bit captures).

 

WIth regards the potential for a mass produced 8" scope - I agree they are very capable instruments - but in this part of the UK we aren't blessed with great skies generally so craters at or just below 2km and linear features just over 1km wide is pretty good even if theoretically there is a little more potential!



#21 Tom Glenn

Tom Glenn

    Gemini

  • -----
  • Posts: 3,293
  • Joined: 07 Feb 2018
  • Loc: San Diego, CA

Posted 21 February 2021 - 03:59 AM

This does bring out the gradients a bit more in the near black areas (Serenity) - I wonder if this is an ICE artefact as I dont it see it to the same extent in the single tile even when subject to the same adjustments in Photoshop (and these are 12 bit captures).

I stopped using ICE when I noticed that it was causing black clipping during the blending.  So it's a real possibility.  Another issue is if you are changing the black level before adjusting the gamma in Photoshop.  Basically, anything that clips data to 0 (black), will then result in problems if you try to re-stretch the data.  This is why ICE mosaics can be problematic in post-processing.


  • JamesCook1971 likes this

#22 Borodog

Borodog

    Surveyor 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 1,548
  • Joined: 26 Oct 2020

Posted 21 February 2021 - 04:26 PM

Interesting. What do you mosaic in now?

#23 Tom Glenn

Tom Glenn

    Gemini

  • -----
  • Posts: 3,293
  • Joined: 07 Feb 2018
  • Loc: San Diego, CA

Posted 21 February 2021 - 04:57 PM

Interesting. What do you mosaic in now?

Personally I use the photo merge option in Photoshop.  This has gotten better over the last several years, and now does a very good job.  Because everything is done in layers, you can fairly easily inspect what is happening during the blend, and if you don't like the result, you can try again.  I'll have to revisit ICE, because I remember someone telling me that there is a way to export the output as Photoshop layers, so maybe the program is still viable, but I never revisited it after moving on.  In particular, the blended output from ICE was deleting data along the terminator, and this was unrecoverable.  There should be no black clipping in an unedited lunar image.  The background should always be above 0, and then you can change this as one of the final steps in processing.  


  • JamesCook1971 likes this

#24 JamesCook1971

JamesCook1971

    Lift Off

  • -----
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 17
  • Joined: 13 Jun 2020
  • Loc: Essex, UK

Posted 26 February 2021 - 04:50 PM

Personally I use the photo merge option in Photoshop.  This has gotten better over the last several years, and now does a very good job.  Because everything is done in layers, you can fairly easily inspect what is happening during the blend, and if you don't like the result, you can try again.  I'll have to revisit ICE, because I remember someone telling me that there is a way to export the output as Photoshop layers, so maybe the program is still viable, but I never revisited it after moving on.  In particular, the blended output from ICE was deleting data along the terminator, and this was unrecoverable.  There should be no black clipping in an unedited lunar image.  The background should always be above 0, and then you can change this as one of the final steps in processing.  

If you select file format as Adobe Photoshop it gives you the option to export all layers or just the composite




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