Your higher detail 2nd image looks slightly over processed. Remember, the sun is made of gas! and should naturally be softer. Just my opinion, thats all.
Derek, thanks for not colorizing or using a negative disc image - they generally make image evaluation difficult.
These are very good first images. However, rather than being over-processed, they instead both are noticeably off-band, with a predominance of dark mottles (aka spicules) that are +/- 0.5 A off the 6562.8 A line.
One of the downsides of the Quark filters is that they vary greatly as to a set temperature and the actual center wavelength (CWL), and you have to "guess" what the correct temperature dial setting is. This is particularly difficult for those new to H-alpha where on versus off-band image subtleties are difficult to differentiate.
Below on the left is Derek's close-up with the 102ED telescope and Quark filter image, on the right is an on-band image made with a pair of Tucson SM90 etalons with an ED100/900 telescope at roughly the same image scale.
Click for larger.
Just seeing prominences and filaments is not accurate enough to determine if you are on-band, and learning to judge by the actual observation of active regions, including fibriles, plage, and other subtle chromospheric network features of the disc is IMHO essential.
Note that double stacking* eliminates the need for separate disc and prominence exposures, or the use of a negative disc image to blend the two.
*Properly exposed single stack images with a uniform contrast gradient can actually produce similar results if processed well.
Edited by BYoesle, Yesterday, 03:35 PM.