Back to forums

m45 processing request.

Processing Deep Sky M45 Messier Objects
13 replies•423 views
tantalusthief avatar
tantalusthief avatar
Can anyone process this m45 to their own style. I'm curious if i can it get more clear data from the nebula surrounding the stars. 

https://www.mediafire.com/file/srp3cwdzchke818/m45+300mm+gx+169.fits/file
Oscar avatar
Oscar avatar
okay, I'll try
Richard Mak avatar
Richard Mak avatar
Gladly. Thank you for the opportunity!
Oscar avatar
Oscar avatar
ouch

your data definitely doesn't like Starnet; just too much bloating

but I'm getting somewhere
Eric Gagne avatar
Eric Gagne avatar
I think you'd be doing yourself a favor if you stopped at 250mm with that lens.   All the youtubers I've seen talking about it (including Nebula Photos and Astrobackyard) say it's not very good with stars at FL above that.
Well Written Concise
Oscar avatar
Oscar avatar
unfortunately, this is the best I can do


  • DynamicCrop
  • BXT - correct only
  • ColorSaturation - desaturated all colors a lot
  • ArcsinhStretch
  • image rotated
  • NoiseXterminator
Ryan Génier avatar
Ryan Génier avatar
Here's my take on the data. The data was pretty rough, but got something decent from it.

- Crop to remove stacking artifacts around perimeter.
- BlurX (default)
- ImageSolver
- SPCC
- EZStretch
- Remove purple tint (Invert --> SCNR)
- Contrast boost (lum mask, protect highlights)
- Saturation boost (lum mask, protect shadows)
- Saturation boost (lum mask, protect highlights)
- SCNR
- NoiseX (0.5)
KuriousGeorge avatar
KuriousGeorge avatar
Here's a relatively heavy stretch...

tantalusthief avatar
tantalusthief avatar
Eric Gagne:
I think you'd be doing yourself a favor if you stopped at 250mm with that lens.   All the youtubers I've seen talking about it (including Nebula Photos and Astrobackyard) say it's not very good with stars at FL above that.

Thanks for the tip. Yeah the lens doesn't do well on broadband stars.
tantalusthief avatar
tantalusthief avatar
Oscar:
unfortunately, this is the best I can do

  • DynamicCrop
  • BXT - correct only
  • ColorSaturation - desaturated all colors a lot
  • ArcsinhStretch
  • image rotated
  • NoiseXterminator

thanks for the attempt. Yeah I agree the stars are too bloated. It was the best i could focus it on for the session.
wsg avatar
wsg avatar
When imaging objects with dominant bright stars you are better off exposing for the best outcome for the stars and worrying about stretching nebulosity after getting the stars right.  It is important to use proper gain for the object, sky conditions and exposure length.  The histogram is your friend.

20 minutes in Pixinsight and Photoshop
PI:
Bxt correct
Star reduction in PS Utilities
Bxt mild deconvolution
Object recognition

PS:
Mild stretch of starless image
Mild color boost
Mild curves

PI:
Pixel Math to combine stars and starless
Seti Astro star Halo reduction
Nxt
Dynamic crop


scott
Markice Stephenson avatar
Markice Stephenson avatar


Best I could do. Blew out the cores in trying to see how much dust you had in the bg. Needs a bit more data.

Steps: 

Grax Background removal
SCNR
BXT
Halo-B-Gone (didn't really help much)
Correct Magenta Stars Script
STF Histo Stretch
Graxpert Denoise
StarXT (I'd normally remove in linear stage, process stars separately and screen back in. didn't plan on using the tool until late)
Stretch Starless signal
Grax Denoise
Screen Stars back in
Used star mask from screen-in to boost colors

Could have probably got better looking stars by doing star removal from the jump. Then use duplicate image to process the stars more carefully and screen back in

Markice S
Helpful
KuriousGeorge avatar
KuriousGeorge avatar
Here's a much softer stretch. Very challenging data. 

Dean Linic avatar
Dean Linic avatar