I am always seeking ways to improve my images and would appreciate any on this one.
https://astrob.in/o9kt61/0/
Thanks,
Stan
|
You cannot like this item. Reason: "ANONYMOUS".
You cannot remove your like from this item.
Editing a post is only allowed within 24 hours after creating it.
You cannot Like this post because the topic is closed.
Stan,
Thank you for sharing your image which I think does a fine job highlighting the nebulosity in this area.
The biggest area for improvement I see is the heavy use of noise reduction which has resulted in a loss of detail in the Tulip as well as soft transitions in the surrounding nebulosity. I suspect at least part of the reason is the relatively short integration time. I have imaged extensively with the SVX080T both with and without the .8 reducer and it is a very nice scope. However, it is still only a small refractor. I generally found that I needed ~ 8 hours of integration per channel for my NB images (more for fainter features like the OIII shell of the Crescent or the wispy OIII trails of the California Nebula). Doing this may result in a more detailed and sharper image as well as better vibrancy due to better color information gathered from the weaker channels.
Hope this is helpful. Clear skies,
Arun
|
You cannot like this item. Reason: "ANONYMOUS".
You cannot remove your like from this item.
Editing a post is only allowed within 24 hours after creating it.
You cannot Like this post because the topic is closed.
Stan,
Thank you for sharing your image which I think does a fine job highlighting the nebulosity in this area.
The biggest area for improvement I see is the heavy use of noise reduction which has resulted in a loss of detail in the Tulip as well as soft transitions in the surrounding nebulosity. I suspect at least part of the reason is the relatively short integration time. I have imaged extensively with the SVX080T both with and without the .8 reducer and it is a very nice scope. However, it is still only a small refractor. I generally found that I needed ~ 8 hours of integration per channel for my NB images (more for fainter features like the OIII shell of the Crescent or the wispy OIII trails of the California Nebula). Doing this may result in a more detailed and sharper image as well as better vibrancy due to better color information gathered from the weaker channels.
Hope this is helpful. Clear skies,
Arun
Thank you Arun. I will absolutely do this with all my images. Thanks for taking time to respond.
Stan
|
You cannot like this item. Reason: "ANONYMOUS".
You cannot remove your like from this item.
Editing a post is only allowed within 24 hours after creating it.
You cannot Like this post because the topic is closed.
Stan,
Thank you for sharing your image which I think does a fine job highlighting the nebulosity in this area.
The biggest area for improvement I see is the heavy use of noise reduction which has resulted in a loss of detail in the Tulip as well as soft transitions in the surrounding nebulosity. I suspect at least part of the reason is the relatively short integration time. I have imaged extensively with the SVX080T both with and without the .8 reducer and it is a very nice scope. However, it is still only a small refractor. I generally found that I needed ~ 8 hours of integration per channel for my NB images (more for fainter features like the OIII shell of the Crescent or the wispy OIII trails of the California Nebula). Doing this may result in a more detailed and sharper image as well as better vibrancy due to better color information gathered from the weaker channels.
Hope this is helpful. Clear skies,
Arun
I will gather more data on it as conditions permit.
Your images are superb btw!
Thanks,
Stan
|
You cannot like this item. Reason: "ANONYMOUS".
You cannot remove your like from this item.
Editing a post is only allowed within 24 hours after creating it.
You cannot Like this post because the topic is closed.
2.41
12.17
