Sh2-132 Hubble Palette

I have spent allot of time working on this image. People have told me that likes do not reflect image quality. I have trouble believing this. How else to judge an image? Comments of praise are another way, and all the great images that get alot of likes also get alot of comments. Since I have very few of either, there must be something wrong with this image. Please provide CC so that I can improve it and subsequent images. There are a lot of versions--most have very subtle variations. No need to inspect them all. This one is the final version

i appreciate any help you may give.
TOA 130 with ASI 1600 and 3nm Astrodon filters
Ha: 124 300 sec, OIII 107 300 sec, SII: 32 300 sec.

Hi Rodd. The image is excellent, it has details. you can work with it even if it is jpg. I have tried in my own way to see what I can do, and it allows many processes.
It is very nice to see that Blue ray, this denotes a good processing and acquisition.
As shown in your gallery, you are an expert, and first of all you have to like yourself.
With your permission, I post a test of mine, and a bad image does not allow the stars to be removed correctly.
I think you know how it turned out. Your honest image is very ok. I like it.

Iosif Bodnariu:
With your permission, I post a test of mine, and a bad image does not allow the stars to be removed correctly.I think you know how it turned out. Your honest image is very ok. I like it.

Thanks Iosif. You starless image is very interesting. If I am not mistaken that is a photoshop technique, correct? I have tried to remove stars in Pixinsight but was only partially successful. Thanks for your comments!
Rodd

No, starless is an module in Pixinsight, find it in PixInsight forum, if you don't find this module i'll sent it to you.
Here you have the link. Is verry easy to work with it.
https://pixinsight.com/forum/index.php?topic=13691.0Have an good day.

Iosif Bodnariu:
No, starless is an module in Pixinsight, find it in PixInsight forum, if you don't find this module i'll sent it to you.Here you have the link. Is verry easy to work with it.
https://pixinsight.com/forum/index.php?topic=13691.0Have an good day.

Wow I did not know pixinsight had that. Thanks!

Rodd, your image is great and i would be really proud of it if i were in your place. I told you before that you will never get a "like" from my side as long as you do not provide your acquisition details in the search fields. AstroBins `database believes that this image has not seen any integration time at all. All my filters and searches are based on that fact, so i never get to see any of your images -> i will never like one nor comment anything.

Rodd Dryfoos:
I have spent allot of time working on this image.

Why not spend 5 minutes more and add your acquisition details?

Michael Timm:
Rodd, your image is great and i would be really proud of it if i were in your place. I told you before that you will never get a "like" from my side as long as you do not provide your acquisition details in the search fields. AstroBins `database believes that this image has not seen any integration time at all. All my filters and searches are based on that fact, so i never get to see any of your images -> i will never like one nor comment anything.
Rodd Dryfoos:
I have spent allot of time working on this image.

Why not spend 5 minutes more and add your acquisition details?

The acquisition details are in my page with the image. I input my gear as someone once suggested I do. I did not realize that there was another page for acquisition. That seems a bit much since the acquisition details are in my comments.

Here is my point. 152 people have seen this image. About 1/3 liked it. Based on my other images, these numbers will likely top out at 300 looks and 70-110 likes after about a year. To me that sounds like people think the image is lacking in something.
Rodd

Rodd Dryfoos:
The acquisition details are in my page with the image. I input my gear as someone once suggested I do. I did not realize that there was another page for acquisition. That seems a bit much since the acquisition details are in my comments.

It's just my point, you can put the acquisition details wherever you want. I am just saying that all of my searches contain something like "integration time > 0 hours". If you put the integration time only in the description, the database does not know about it and i will not see your image.
Look at this example:
M 42
If you look right under the image AstroBin tells you that i imaged 3 hours in total. 2 hours with 5 min subs and 1 hour with 1 min subs. I know that you also provide this information in your description, but the description is only human-readable, not machine-readable, so my search won't show me any of your images :-(

Michael Timm:
Rodd Dryfoos:
The acquisition details are in my page with the image. I input my gear as someone once suggested I do. I did not realize that there was another page for acquisition. That seems a bit much since the acquisition details are in my comments.
It's just my point, you can put the acquisition details wherever you want. I am just saying that all of my searches contain something like "integration time > 0 hours". If you put the integration time only in the description, the database does not know about it and i will not see your image.
Look at this example:
M 42
If you look right under the image Astrobin tells you that i imaged 3 hours in total. 2 hours with 5 min subs and 1 hour with 1 min subs. I know that you also provide this information in your description, but the description is only human-readable, not machine-readable, so my search won't show me any of your images :-(

You actually search based on integration time? I usually search based on target name (or designation), or scope, or camera (rarely). But integration time....I have never done that. Interesting. I will endeavor to populate the acquisition fields for my images--quite a project for over 100 . Unlike the gear, using the copy function won't work as the integration times are usually different for every image as apposed to gear--which is limitred to 4 set ups for me (and I stick with one for extended periods so really just one for long stretches)
Rodd

Rodd Dryfoos:
It's just my point, you can put the acquisition details wherever you want. I am just saying that all of my searches contain something like "integration time > 0 hours". If you put the integration time only in the description, the database does not know about it and i will not see your image.Look at this example:
M 42
If you look right under the image Astrobin tells you that i imaged 3 hours in total. 2 hours with 5 min subs and 1 hour with 1 min subs. I know that you also provide this information in your description, but the description is only human-readable, not machine-readable, so my search won't show me any of your images :-(

Now that I look, each filter has its own page--sorry, but that is ridiculous. On DSO (Telescopius now) you can fill all filters and gear and acquisition times on one form. I am sorry, but I am not likely to input four pages for my acquisition details. I don't think many people search by aquisition details.
Rodd

Rodd Dryfoos:
It's just my point, you can put the acquisition details wherever you want. I am just saying that all of my searches contain something like "integration time > 0 hours". If you put the integration time only in the description, the database does not know about it and i will not see your image.Look at this example:
M 42
If you look right under the image Astrobin tells you that i imaged 3 hours in total. 2 hours with 5 min subs and 1 hour with 1 min subs. I know that you also provide this information in your description, but the description is only human-readable, not machine-readable, so my search won't show me any of your images :-(

I just tried to add filters to my gear (only the Ha is on the list)--but I could not find how to do it. Without all filters, I can't input the acquisition details

I've AB in Italian so something could be lost in the translation, anyway:
- click on the small button near the big button with your name/nick on the right-top of the page ( the one with the small arrow that points down )
- MySettings/Settings ( last entry before 'logout' )
- On the left panel choose instrumentation/gear ( strumentazione in italian ), the second entry.
- Here you should have the 'filters' section ( right before the last entry, 'software' )

I've AB in Italian so something could be lost in the translation, anyway:- click on the small button near the big button with your name/nick on the right-top of the page ( the one with the small arrow that points down )
- MySettings/Settings ( last entry before 'logout' )
- On the left panel choose instrumentation/gear ( strumentazione in italian ), the second entry.
- Here you should have the 'filters' section ( right before the last entry, 'software' )

Grazie Tante! I will have a look.
Rodd

Prego

Ciao,
Stefano.

Rodd Dryfoos:
It's just my point, you can put the acquisition details wherever you want. I am just saying that all of my searches contain something like "integration time > 0 hours". If you put the integration time only in the description, the database does not know about it and i will not see your image.Look at this example:

OK Michael--I have input my integration time--Thanks to Stefano I was able to add filters. Now I will populate the acquisition details for al my images over the next couple of weeks. Thanks for the feed back
Rodd

Michael Timm:
It's just my point, you can put the acquisition details wherever you want. I am just saying that all of my searches contain something like "integration time > 0 hours". If you put the integration time only in the description, the database does not know about it and i will not see your image.Look at this example:

I botched the quote process Michael and quoted myself--meant for you. see my last post
Rodd

Rodd Dryfoos:
You actually search based on integration time? I usually search based on target name (or designation), or scope, or camera (rarely). But integration time….

Just to clarify: Of course i search for target names or specific equipment or something else. I just filter all results so i do not see all those images lacking basic informations (like scope, camera or even integration time).

Rodd Dryfoos:
OK Michael–I have input my integration time–Thanks to Stefano I was able to add filters. Now I will populate the acquisition details for al my images over the next couple of weeks.

I am very happy to hear that! This is one important difference between facebook and AstroBin: The ability to search - based on a well designed database. Thanks for participating, Rodd

Michael Timm:
I am very happy to hear that! This is one important difference between facebook and AstroBin: The ability to search - based on a well designed database. Thanks for participating, Rodd smile

I do find it very frustrating to search for a target for planning purposes and no scope or camera is listed, so I can understand integration times being important. For some targets I suppose they are critical.
Rodd

Related discussions