[RCC] M42 in RGB - Forums

Topic starter

Mar 10, 2025

Hello,

Looking for some input on this image to see where I can improve. Typically I push an image to where I think it looks good but with this one I'm not so sure.

Link to M-42 in RGB

https://app.astrobin.com/u/JCLivingston?i=l31wk7

My workflow in PixInsight is fairly standard and it is only when I get into Photoshop do things sometimes go off the rails.. I use autostretch and haven't played with manual stretching since before I used PixInsight. Note my progression on adding more time to the image.

WBPP with 1x drizzle
BlurX correct only
Spectrophotographic Color Calibration
BlurX
StarX
Create HDR Image (perhaps my biggest issue with the brightness)
(brought starless image into Photoshop to use Spot Healing Brush to fix a few star halos)
(brought stars image into Photoshop to take purples down in camera raw to remove purple halos from stars, I'm using a AT80ED doublet..)
Curves - (sometimes gets me into trouble too)
PixelMath to replace stars
Photoshop for Camera RAW edits
Effects adjustment Texture, Clarity, Dehaze (these are dangerous too if pushed too high)
Increase saturation/vibrance
Curves adjustment

No layer masks on this one as I've only begun to play with them. I didn't do a star reduction on this one. With this image, it looks best on my PC but when posted to media, it loses its detail and looks flat.

I've been doing mostly narrowband since last June so this is my first try at M42 in RGB. I didn't use a Luminance layer which would be an easy effort. However, I didn't adjust my exposure time for M42 so I may have overexposed my subs.

Helpful

andrea tasselli

Frequent contributor

Mar 10, 2025

Your overdid and overcooked it big time. It is more like a piece of conceptual arts than an astro-photo, if I can be so blunt. But if this is your style which seems to be the case looking at your gallery, then by all means keep at it, as I can't see any fault.

Mel Martin

Mar 10, 2025

Franky, the first version is the best to my eye. The more you processed it, the worse it got. A not uncommon issue in all photographic processing.

Well Written

patrice_so

Mar 10, 2025

I think like Andrea that it is overcooked. The HDRMlutiscaleTransform and LocalHistogramEqulization (or analog functions) were apply with much too high settings. The drawback of these tools is that they mae you image look flat instead of a real view of space with gaz existing in three dimensions. Your image is also too sharp. Colors are nice.

I would also try to give the Halo B Gone tool of Seti-astro a try to see if it helps with the blue chromatic aberration.

If you like very intense images, I would simply try to reduce the nebula sharpness. Be gentle with the tools

CS Patrice

PS : you have lots of image in your gallery that are great and not as cooked as this one.

Helpful Respectful Supportive

Jason Livingston

Topic starter

Mar 10, 2025

patrice_so:
I think like Andrea that it is overcooked. The HDRMlutiscaleTransform and LocalHistogramEqulization (or analog functions) were apply with much too high settings. The drawback of these tools is that they mae you image look flat instead of a real view of space with gaz existing in three dimensions. Your image is also too sharp. Colors are nice.

I would also try to give the Halo B Gone tool of Seti-astro a try to see if it helps with the blue chromatic aberration.

If you like very intense images, I would simply try to reduce the nebula sharpness. Be gentle with the tools

CS Patrice

PS : you have lots of image in your gallery that are great and not as cooked as this one.

Thanks for the suggestions! My wife is an abstract artist and you should all see what she does with my images!

As you can see from my gallery I tend to push it. I tend to zoom in and get the details out and not look at the overall picture. However, I think there's room for pushing it.

Best thing about this is with 6 hours of data for each filter, I can work on this well into next season!

Jason Livingston

Topic starter

Mar 10, 2025

Mel Martin:
Franky, the first version is the best to my eye. The more you processed it, the worse it got. A not uncommon issue in all photographic processing.

Thank you for responding. I have only been using PixInsight for 6 months and I've never been ok in Photoshop so I still consider myself "new". With all the tools, the tendency is to use 'em all!

Well Written

Jason Livingston

Topic starter

Mar 10, 2025

andrea tasselli:
Your overdid and overcooked it big time. It is more like a piece of conceptual arts than an astro-photo, if I can be so blunt. But if this is your style which seems to be the case looking at your gallery, then by all means keep at it, as I can't see any fault.

Thank you for your input. I try to make it look "good" to me but with this one, even after coming back the next day, I was still going too far. Do we sometimes sacrifice detail for overall composition?

Well Written

patrice_so

Mar 10, 2025

Jason Livingston:
patrice_so:
I think like Andrea that it is overcooked. The HDRMlutiscaleTransform and LocalHistogramEqulization (or analog functions) were apply with much too high settings. The drawback of these tools is that they mae you image look flat instead of a real view of space with gaz existing in three dimensions. Your image is also too sharp. Colors are nice.

I would also try to give the Halo B Gone tool of Seti-astro a try to see if it helps with the blue chromatic aberration.

If you like very intense images, I would simply try to reduce the nebula sharpness. Be gentle with the tools

CS Patrice

PS : you have lots of image in your gallery that are great and not as cooked as this one.

Thanks for the suggestions! My wife is an abstract artist and you should all see what she does with my images!

As you can see from my gallery I tend to push it. I tend to zoom in and get the details out and not look at the overall picture. However, I think there's room for pushing it.

Best thing about this is with 6 hours of data for each filter, I can work on this well into next season!

Excellent. Indeed, I have another important suggestion.

--> Try to use masks to apply sharpening and contrast tools in a differenciated manner to darker and clearer parts of the image. You can for instance apply local constrast quite strongly but with a large Kernel radius to dark area to bring out the dust structures while protecting the clearer area with a mask. You can reverse your mask to apply more gentle correction to the clearer areas.

I do that in almost all images, including my newest M42 : https://app.astrobin.com/u/patrice_so?i=6v2niy#staging

CS

Patrice

Helpful Insightful

James Markgraf

Mar 10, 2025

For my tastes, it is over-processed. It looks more like a piece of stained glass than an astrophoto. While not unappealing, I think the amount of processing you put into it makes it look flat, like a pressed flower. My only advice would be try to dial it back a bit to try to give it a softer, more 3D finish. The colors look good IMO but are lost due to the pressed flower effect.

Well Written Insightful Respectful Concise Engaging

Tony Gondola

Frequent contributor

Mar 10, 2025

Yikes, processing gone wild! I'm assuming you want this all sliders to full look. For me, it just doesn't work. Fun to see it though.

Jason Livingston

Topic starter

Mar 10, 2025

Tony Gondola:
Yikes, processing gone wild! I'm assuming you want this all sliders to full look. For me, it just doesn't work. Fun to see it though.

Just because you can doesn't mean you should. See Version E for a dialed back version. I do like pushing it but like others have said, it gets this flat look that you just can't get out of once it goes there..