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

Critique my M45?

  • Please log in to reply
22 replies to this topic

#1 Cfeastside

Cfeastside

    Mariner 2

  • -----
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 293
  • Joined: 28 Apr 2020
  • Loc: Eastern sierra California

Posted 30 November 2021 - 11:28 AM

I’d be interested hearing your thoughts on how to improve this image.  I struggled with processing the dust around pleiades.  With regards to that i’m wondering if i stretched it too much as it looks too noisy, and wondering if i didnt get rid of a light pollution gradient from lower right to left.  I applied the light pollution tool in APP  there on the right side.  Kinda thought it was brighter on the right side due to the dust though.  

 

This also my first time using this camera, asi071 mc pro.  I was using the asi294 mc pro before.  Kinda feels like this is a bit noisier.  

I use Astropixel processor then output to photoshop for noise reduction, star reduction, tonal adjustments and sharpening.  

 

This is just a bit more than 7 hours of integration. 

Wo gt81 w/0.8 flattener
Asi071mc pro, unity gain/offset, 90/65, cooled to  -5* 
Asi224 guide cam
Wo unicam 32
Heq5 pro
Lights 295 @ 90s
flats, Darks, dark flats  60
Bortle 4
No filters

 

link to full res tiff file via google drive:

https://drive.google...iew?usp=sharing

 

 

i can provide larger files latter if interested via google drive

F161F9BA-38B9-46EF-98BA-2BEA081EFF36.jpeg


Edited by Cfeastside, 30 November 2021 - 07:40 PM.

  • F.Meiresonne, Mert, CCD-Freak and 18 others like this

#2 John Rogers

John Rogers

    Viking 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 925
  • Joined: 08 Feb 2008

Posted 30 November 2021 - 11:41 AM

How to improve on arguably one of the best photos of M45?  Good question!

 

Great photo and thanks for sharing!


  • Cfeastside likes this

#3 spyderbench

spyderbench

    Vostok 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 112
  • Joined: 13 Jul 2018
  • Loc: Charleston / Walterboro SC

Posted 30 November 2021 - 11:42 AM

 I love the varying star colors and thank you for not hubble-palette-ing this fine image. Focus is spot on as well

 

.


  • Cfeastside likes this

#4 petert913

petert913

    Fly Me to the Moon

  • *****
  • Posts: 5,098
  • Joined: 27 May 2013
  • Loc: Silverton, OR

Posted 30 November 2021 - 11:47 AM

Lots of nebulosity and wispy details !


  • Cfeastside likes this

#5 Cfeastside

Cfeastside

    Mariner 2

  • -----
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 293
  • Joined: 28 Apr 2020
  • Loc: Eastern sierra California

Posted 30 November 2021 - 12:18 PM

How to improve on arguably one of the best photos of M45?  Good question!

 

Great photo and thanks for sharing!

Thanks for the kind words!  Youre being way too kind 😉



#6 Cfeastside

Cfeastside

    Mariner 2

  • -----
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 293
  • Joined: 28 Apr 2020
  • Loc: Eastern sierra California

Posted 30 November 2021 - 12:26 PM

 I love the varying star colors and thank you for not hubble-palette-ing this fine image. Focus is spot on as well

 

.

Thanks!  Nina auto focus routine is awesome!

 

Lots of nebulosity and wispy details !

Thanks.  Thats what i was trying to achieve wasnt sure if i got it



#7 Mert

Mert

    Cosmos

  • *****
  • Posts: 8,671
  • Joined: 31 Aug 2005
  • Loc: Spain, Pamplona

Posted 30 November 2021 - 12:45 PM

That's fabulous, what a great colors in here!

I like the dust around, that 071 has a great dynamic range!


  • Cfeastside likes this

#8 Cfeastside

Cfeastside

    Mariner 2

  • -----
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 293
  • Joined: 28 Apr 2020
  • Loc: Eastern sierra California

Posted 30 November 2021 - 03:06 PM

That's fabulous, what a great colors in here!

I like the dust around, that 071 has a great dynamic range!

Thanks!  Liking the 071 so far.  Well see how it does on mss and horsehead this week



#9 imtl

imtl

    Aurora

  • *****
  • Moderators
  • Posts: 4,981
  • Joined: 07 Jun 2016
  • Loc: Down in a hole

Posted 30 November 2021 - 03:38 PM

Well I don't think there is so much to say from a low resolution image like this. You should consider uploading a full scale image to your astrobin. It seems from this you got a lot of artifacts but again hard to judge from this. Maybe others see it differently. Keep in mind this is experienced imaging forum...


  • Cfeastside likes this

#10 Cfeastside

Cfeastside

    Mariner 2

  • -----
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 293
  • Joined: 28 Apr 2020
  • Loc: Eastern sierra California

Posted 30 November 2021 - 04:01 PM

Well I don't think there is so much to say from a low resolution image like this. You should consider uploading a full scale image to your astrobin. It seems from this you got a lot of artifacts but again hard to judge from this. Maybe others see it differently. Keep in mind this is experienced imaging forum...

Ill upload a larger reolution file this evening.  Shoulda just done that from the get go.  I need some evaluation on whether my processing procedure is killing detail.  



#11 imtl

imtl

    Aurora

  • *****
  • Moderators
  • Posts: 4,981
  • Joined: 07 Jun 2016
  • Loc: Down in a hole

Posted 30 November 2021 - 04:12 PM

Well, it might be just me but looking at your astrobin and going to full resolution does not give really a full resolution image. It's less than 1Mb file. In any case it looks like you burned quite a lot of star cores and you got some color abberations going. I cannot really judge more than that from this image. Maybe others could pitch in.


  • Cfeastside likes this

#12 Cfeastside

Cfeastside

    Mariner 2

  • -----
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 293
  • Joined: 28 Apr 2020
  • Loc: Eastern sierra California

Posted 30 November 2021 - 04:30 PM

Well, it might be just me but looking at your astrobin and going to full resolution does not give really a full resolution image. It's less than 1Mb file. In any case it looks like you burned quite a lot of star cores and you got some color abberations going. I cannot really judge more than that from this image. Maybe others could pitch in.

Cool thanks for looking at it.  Im seeing the blown cores and slight banding in some areas.  Re the cores, i didnt run into that with the 294 mc pro and maybe thats a difference in that sensor and the 071 with regards to dynamic range.  Or maybe my exposure was just too long.   Im really curious about the banding im seeing. I think that might be from the stretching and light pollution tool.  



#13 elmiko

elmiko

    Fly Me to the Moon

  • *****
  • Posts: 6,279
  • Joined: 27 Jul 2009
  • Loc: Arizona

Posted 30 November 2021 - 04:45 PM

I think it turned out excellent! The gradient you mentioned, looks like nebulosity to me! I use the same camera. I use a Uvir filter. It doesn't have a built-in on like some cameras do. It will help with any star bloat.

Nice job!


  • Cfeastside likes this

#14 ebonnevi

ebonnevi

    Explorer 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 66
  • Joined: 11 Oct 2020

Posted 30 November 2021 - 05:13 PM

There is not much to say, the picture is really beautiful. But if I force myself to criticize I have to open the full resolution version and with this version I believe that there would be a way to reduce the noise still in post processing.

 :)

but still.. WOW


  • Cfeastside likes this

#15 Cfeastside

Cfeastside

    Mariner 2

  • -----
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 293
  • Joined: 28 Apr 2020
  • Loc: Eastern sierra California

Posted 30 November 2021 - 06:40 PM

I think it turned out excellent! The gradient you mentioned, looks like nebulosity to me! I use the same camera. I use a Uvir filter. It doesn't have a built-in on like some cameras do. It will help with any star bloat.

Nice job!

Thanks man for kind words and feedback.  I need to look into the filter

 

There is not much to say, the picture is really beautiful. But if I force myself to criticize I have to open the full resolution version and with this version I believe that there would be a way to reduce the noise still in post processing.

 smile.gif

but still.. WOW

Thank you.  Ill upload a higher rez image tonight incase anyone want look it over.  My noise reduction is pretty basic and done using ps.  I need to work on that.  Plus learn when im stretching data too much


  • elmiko and Look at the sky 101 like this

#16 Cfeastside

Cfeastside

    Mariner 2

  • -----
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 293
  • Joined: 28 Apr 2020
  • Loc: Eastern sierra California

Posted 30 November 2021 - 07:41 PM

full res tiff file here:

https://drive.google...iew?usp=sharing



#17 Look at the sky 101

Look at the sky 101

    Viking 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 779
  • Joined: 02 Nov 2021
  • Loc: On the bleu dot, 45.20 n 123,09 w

Posted 30 November 2021 - 07:51 PM

I’d be interested hearing your thoughts on how to improve this image.  I struggled with processing the dust around pleiades.  With regards to that i’m wondering if i stretched it too much as it looks too noisy, and wondering if i didnt get rid of a light pollution gradient from lower right to left.  I applied the light pollution tool in APP  there on the right side.  Kinda thought it was brighter on the right side due to the dust though.  

 

This also my first time using this camera, asi071 mc pro.  I was using the asi294 mc pro before.  Kinda feels like this is a bit noisier.  

I use Astropixel processor then output to photoshop for noise reduction, star reduction, tonal adjustments and sharpening.  

 

This is just a bit more than 7 hours of integration. 

Wo gt81 w/0.8 flattener
Asi071mc pro, unity gain/offset, 90/65, cooled to  -5* 
Asi224 guide cam
Wo unicam 32
Heq5 pro
Lights 295 @ 90s
flats, Darks, dark flats  60
Bortle 4
No filters

 

link to full res tiff file via google drive:

https://drive.google...iew?usp=sharing

 

 

i can provide larger files latter if interested via google drive

attachicon.gifF161F9BA-38B9-46EF-98BA-2BEA081EFF36.jpeg

I'm still trying to figure out how to criticize your photo , hummmm  .


  • Cfeastside likes this

#18 ebonnevi

ebonnevi

    Explorer 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 66
  • Joined: 11 Oct 2020

Posted 30 November 2021 - 08:10 PM

full res tiff file here:

https://drive.google...iew?usp=sharing

small coma in every corner when zooming the hi-res photo ;)



#19 Cfeastside

Cfeastside

    Mariner 2

  • -----
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 293
  • Joined: 28 Apr 2020
  • Loc: Eastern sierra California

Posted 30 November 2021 - 08:34 PM

I'm still trying to figure out how to criticize your photo , hummmm  .

thanks for thinking on it!  perhaps:

noise levels and tonality in the dust lanes? and a way to address

 

 

small coma in every corner when zooming the hi-res photo wink.gif

good eye.  i think i need to adjust my focal reducer distance setting to address that right?



#20 Huangdi

Huangdi

    Apollo

  • *****
  • Posts: 1,104
  • Joined: 24 Jul 2019

Posted 01 December 2021 - 02:14 AM

First of all - Awesome image! You controlled the immense dynamic range very well and the image does have a natural look, I really like it!

 

As for critique, there are some minor points:

 

1. I hope this isn't my screen (admittedly my laptop isn't the best), but I do see a green tint in the shadows. With a run of SCNR (or a simple green curves subtraction) this could be fixed though.

 

2. When zooming all the way in, its easy to see some processing artefacts. The finely grained noise that you usually want to preserve to some degree has been lost and instead there's mottling and it has a plasticized look to it. This often comes from using software such as Topaz Denoise or in general, too much noise reduction. 

 

3. The stars also were affected by the heavy noise reduction. They look quite soft and have lost their original PSF.

 

 

That being said, I know how hard it is to maintain good noise levels and control stars -  I myself struggle a lot with this. So keep up the great work! It's a fantastic image! cool.gif


  • imtl likes this

#21 ebonnevi

ebonnevi

    Explorer 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 66
  • Joined: 11 Oct 2020

Posted 01 December 2021 - 06:55 AM

thanks for thinking on it!  perhaps:

noise levels and tonality in the dust lanes? and a way to address

 

 

good eye.  i think i need to adjust my focal reducer distance setting to address that right?

Yes you need a very small adjustment on your flattener. good luck!



#22 Cfeastside

Cfeastside

    Mariner 2

  • -----
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 293
  • Joined: 28 Apr 2020
  • Loc: Eastern sierra California

Posted 01 December 2021 - 08:45 AM

First of all - Awesome image! You controlled the immense dynamic range very well and the image does have a natural look, I really like it!

 

As for critique, there are some minor points:

 

1. I hope this isn't my screen (admittedly my laptop isn't the best), but I do see a green tint in the shadows. With a run of SCNR (or a simple green curves subtraction) this could be fixed though.

 

2. When zooming all the way in, its easy to see some processing artefacts. The finely grained noise that you usually want to preserve to some degree has been lost and instead there's mottling and it has a plasticized look to it. This often comes from using software such as Topaz Denoise or in general, too much noise reduction. this is probably from PS noise reduction i applied.  i need to read up on noise reduction methods.

 

3. The stars also were affected by the heavy noise reduction. They look quite soft and have lost their original PSF. psf?

 

 

That being said, I know how hard it is to maintain good noise levels and control stars -  I myself struggle a lot with this. So keep up the great work! It's a fantastic image! cool.gif

thanks for your critique! much appreciated

 

Yes you need a very small adjustment on your flattener. good luck!

that small adjustment is challenging haha



#23 Cfeastside

Cfeastside

    Mariner 2

  • -----
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 293
  • Joined: 28 Apr 2020
  • Loc: Eastern sierra California

Posted 02 December 2021 - 10:26 AM

just to summarize on a few things in case anyone else who is still on the steep side of the learning curve comes across this in the future.  i was having the guys on the APP forum check this integrated file and my calibration files.  calibration files were working.  but they noted that the noise in my integrated stack was likely due to too short of an exposure.  also determined my dither settings probably weren't quite dialed in.

 

so when i redo this image i will expose longer for that faint nebulosity and likely shoot separate subs for the core stars.  I thought i could slightly under expose to preserve completely blowing out the core stars and make up for the shorter exposures by having more subs.  l wasn't sure if that would work and it really didn't.  i was not happy when i opened up the stacked integrated files with the amount of noise i was seeing.  especially with a new camera that was supposed to be pretty clean.

 

contrast this image with my current horsehead and flame nebula with this camera.  the integrated stack i'm seeing is supper clean and noiseless compared to this pleiades shot.  i was much relieved to see!  i must be on target with that exposure.

anyways just thought i'd follow up with a summary.  thanks for all the kind words and advice given on this image.




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