I've been sitting on the fence about going from OSC to mono imaging for a long time now. I'd love to have a complete LRGB data set to process out to get a better feel for what I'd be getting into. Does anyone know of a data set that's publicly available?
Sitting on the fence
Well Written Engaging
I'd also be curious about that…. as I am also on the fence.
I can't remember exactly how good/bad the data is. Depending on if it's my widefield (decent data) NGC1333 or the data from my C8 (not very good). They are .xisf as I use pixinsight. If you need .tiff I think you can convert them using graxpert.
But here's a link to LRGB for NGC1333. https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1t4Te4q5tcob4rNpus3vmu_MgccuwfFJ1?usp=drive_link
Then here's I think Ha LRGB for LBN 437. https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1e4ijWR2QOj7nu01G2o9CzT2htj_7PwLI?usp=drive_link
But here's a link to LRGB for NGC1333. https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1t4Te4q5tcob4rNpus3vmu_MgccuwfFJ1?usp=drive_link
Then here's I think Ha LRGB for LBN 437. https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1e4ijWR2QOj7nu01G2o9CzT2htj_7PwLI?usp=drive_link
If you wanna try your hands on SHORGB data, I can provide some too
Thanks very much Quinn Groessl.
I have Mono but can't shoot Luminance very well in Bortle 8 so this was fun to process.
I think the Data is excellent. I like your image processing a bit better after looking at both.
I appreciate getting to process other peoples data.
I have Mono but can't shoot Luminance very well in Bortle 8 so this was fun to process.
I think the Data is excellent. I like your image processing a bit better after looking at both.
I appreciate getting to process other peoples data.
Médéric Hébert:
If you wanna try your hands on SHORGB data, I can provide some too
That would be excellent!
Tony Gondola:Médéric Hébert:
If you wanna try your hands on SHORGB data, I can provide some too
That would be excellent!
I'd love some SHO data also!
You might find some here: https://erellaz.com/moana/open-datasets/
For what its worth I was in the same boat when I was adding my second camera last summer. However I went with OSC in the end as I already had a mono one. I for one do not regret that one bit. Having mono is nice and all, but mostly for narrowband stuff. I absolutely love having the OSC cam and in retrospect I could not imagine bothering to deal with two mono setups.
For what its worth I was in the same boat when I was adding my second camera last summer. However I went with OSC in the end as I already had a mono one. I for one do not regret that one bit. Having mono is nice and all, but mostly for narrowband stuff. I absolutely love having the OSC cam and in retrospect I could not imagine bothering to deal with two mono setups.
Tony Gondola:Médéric Hébert:
If you wanna try your hands on SHORGB data, I can provide some too
That would be excellent!
Here's the data I used to make this image https://app.astrobin.com/u/sgthebert?i=fsnm5u
It's not great data, but it should work.
https://mega.nz/file/04RHWA4J#A1i9E-tIN0fTqm4VGdhmX14HP7GJU5b06f_sgGxgkBc
To anyone using my data, please send me your results, I'd like to see what can be done out of it, I know it's not great data and I'm not the best at post processing but I'd like to see how far it can go
Médéric Hébert:
To anyone using my data, please send me your results, I'd like to see what can be done out of it, I know it's not great data and I'm not the best at post processing but I'd like to see how far it can go
I'll make sure to do that.
@Tony. You are a person I trust as far as AP and your experience and opinions. I'm interested to hear your experience and how much extra work the processing is versus OSC. I'm going to try to follow the string and see what you learn.
I've read enough to know that I can't argue that the results are generally better. What I don't know is, is the juice worth the squeeze for somebody that's as middle of the road skilled that has me.
I've read enough to know that I can't argue that the results are generally better. What I don't know is, is the juice worth the squeeze for somebody that's as middle of the road skilled that has me.
All my data (of more than a year old) are here for you to practice:
https://app.astrobin.com/u/whwang?i=mt3oit#gallery
And you can find my results on Astrobin.
https://app.astrobin.com/u/whwang?i=mt3oit#gallery
And you can find my results on Astrobin.
Wei-Hao Wang:
All my data (of more than a year old) are here for you to practice:
https://app.astrobin.com/u/whwang?i=mt3oit#gallery
And you can find my results on Astrobin.
Thank you very much, I never expected to get such generous responses.
Clayton Ostler:
@Tony. You are a person I trust as far as AP and your experience and opinions. I'm interested to hear your experience and how much extra work the processing is versus OSC. I'm going to try to follow the string and see what you learn.
I've read enough to know that I can't argue that the results are generally better. What I don't know is, is the juice worth the squeeze for somebody that's as middle of the road skilled that has me.
Thank you Clayton, I will certainly do that.
Well Written Respectful
Médéric Hébert:
To anyone using my data, please send me your results, I'd like to see what can be done out of it, I know it's not great data and I'm not the best at post processing but I'd like to see how far it can go
Here you are. Actually I think you data set is pretty good. I used the RGB data for the stars and the narrowband data for the nebula using a SHO pallet.
My feeling is, with same time RGB and L, you can see the difference immediately after initial stretch, luminance show much more IFN details.
If you're imaging through light polluted skies with OSC and always use filters then you're going to like S H O imaging.
Tony Gondola:Médéric Hébert:
To anyone using my data, please send me your results, I'd like to see what can be done out of it, I know it's not great data and I'm not the best at post processing but I'd like to see how far it can go
Here you are. Actually I think you data set is pretty good. I used the RGB data for the stars and the narrowband data for the nebula using a SHO pallet.
I really like what you did! Now I have to try reprocessing it too XD
Médéric Hébert:Tony Gondola:Médéric Hébert:
To anyone using my data, please send me your results, I'd like to see what can be done out of it, I know it's not great data and I'm not the best at post processing but I'd like to see how far it can go
Here you are. Actually I think you data set is pretty good. I used the RGB data for the stars and the narrowband data for the nebula using a SHO pallet.
I really like what you did! Now I have to try reprocessing it too XD
I should note that this data was very clean, no noise reduction was used.
Well Written
Well, that was fun! I want to thank everyone who contributed data for this little exercise. It was interesting to see what other hardware configurations could do.
To answer Clayton's question, I have to say I'm still on the fence. I really didn't find processing mono data to be that much more work than what I'm doing already. It's not unusual for me to pull out RGB frames for processing, make a synthetic L frame or other combinations. You do have to align the final stacked frames, something that's a given with OSC but it's a very easy step to add to the work flow. There was no questioning the purity of the data, certainly better then just pulling RGB from OSC. That said, I think the thing I noticed the most was how easy it was to make a colorful star plate from the RGB data, something I struggle with in OSC, With the mono data it's just there. It's also pretty clear that the most important frame in LRGB imaging is the L frame.
I suppose I have a bit more of an idea now about what it's like to live in the mono world. I'm still on the fence though because I'm still thinking about the additional investment to go mono although, since I shoot 585, something like a minicam8 lowers the cost of entry a lot. I do worry about the extra work and time needed to get the data, extra calibration frames and such. I know much of that can be automated so it might be more of an imagined problem than a real one. I can see one possibility that's attractive and that's to get a 585 mono camera to go along with my color version. Shoot L frames and narrowband with the mono cam and get the color data via OSC. I think for anyone living with a high degree of light pollution, that might be the best way to go.
I'm curious as to what others who have processed the data think?
To answer Clayton's question, I have to say I'm still on the fence. I really didn't find processing mono data to be that much more work than what I'm doing already. It's not unusual for me to pull out RGB frames for processing, make a synthetic L frame or other combinations. You do have to align the final stacked frames, something that's a given with OSC but it's a very easy step to add to the work flow. There was no questioning the purity of the data, certainly better then just pulling RGB from OSC. That said, I think the thing I noticed the most was how easy it was to make a colorful star plate from the RGB data, something I struggle with in OSC, With the mono data it's just there. It's also pretty clear that the most important frame in LRGB imaging is the L frame.
I suppose I have a bit more of an idea now about what it's like to live in the mono world. I'm still on the fence though because I'm still thinking about the additional investment to go mono although, since I shoot 585, something like a minicam8 lowers the cost of entry a lot. I do worry about the extra work and time needed to get the data, extra calibration frames and such. I know much of that can be automated so it might be more of an imagined problem than a real one. I can see one possibility that's attractive and that's to get a 585 mono camera to go along with my color version. Shoot L frames and narrowband with the mono cam and get the color data via OSC. I think for anyone living with a high degree of light pollution, that might be the best way to go.
I'm curious as to what others who have processed the data think?
Helpful Insightful Respectful Engaging
if you are up for it, I would really like to see how people would edit my data, in particular my Heart Nebula and SNR HB3 - SHO data.
let me know if you would like the stacked frames, will need to restack them tho
let me know if you would like the stacked frames, will need to restack them tho
It was fun to see what can be gotten from my data by someone better at processing it. As for aligning the frames, if you use sirilic, it'll do it automatically. As for calibration data, we're mostly talking about flats and dark flats, which add a bit of time at the end of the night, but not that much, the worse part imo is the size it takes on my hard drive. if you use constant lenght for your flats, you could cut down on the dark flats too. If you are using NINA, with an autofocuser, you don't have much more to do once you've calculated the offsets.
I calculated the other night that on average, for each hour of imaging time, I get about 50-55 minutes of exposure time. That's including slewing, autofocus, meridain flip, dithering, filter changes and so on.
I calculated the other night that on average, for each hour of imaging time, I get about 50-55 minutes of exposure time. That's including slewing, autofocus, meridain flip, dithering, filter changes and so on.
Helpful
Tony Gondola:
Well, that was fun! I want to thank everyone who contributed data for this little exercise. It was interesting to see what other hardware configurations could do.
To answer Clayton's question, I have to say I'm still on the fence. I really didn't find processing mono data to be that much more work than what I'm doing already. It's not unusual for me to pull out RGB frames for processing, make a synthetic L frame or other combinations. You do have to align the final stacked frames, something that's a given with OSC but it's a very easy step to add to the work flow. There was no questioning the purity of the data, certainly better then just pulling RGB from OSC. That said, I think the thing I noticed the most was how easy it was to make a colorful star plate from the RGB data, something I struggle with in OSC, With the mono data it's just there. It's also pretty clear that the most important frame in LRGB imaging is the L frame.
I suppose I have a bit more of an idea now about what it's like to live in the mono world. I'm still on the fence though because I'm still thinking about the additional investment to go mono although, since I shoot 585, something like a minicam8 lowers the cost of entry a lot. I do worry about the extra work and time needed to get the data, extra calibration frames and such. I know much of that can be automated so it might be more of an imagined problem than a real one. I can see one possibility that's attractive and that's to get a 585 mono camera to go along with my color version. Shoot L frames and narrowband with the mono cam and get the color data via OSC. I think for anyone living with a high degree of light pollution, that might be the best way to go.
I'm curious as to what others who have processed the data think?
Thanks Tony
Great info. This gives me something to think about. If you are on the fence, I would consider myself looking at the fence. It could be laziness, it could be fear of something new, it could be that I'm just stubborn, but the thought of stopping my osc just seems hard
Médéric Hébert:
It was fun to see what can be gotten from my data by someone better at processing it. As for aligning the frames, if you use sirilic, it'll do it automatically. As for calibration data, we're mostly talking about flats and dark flats, which add a bit of time at the end of the night, but not that much, the worse part imo is the size it takes on my hard drive. if you use constant lenght for your flats, you could cut down on the dark flats too. If you are using NINA, with an autofocuser, you don't have much more to do once you've calculated the offsets.
I calculated the other night that on average, for each hour of imaging time, I get about 50-55 minutes of exposure time. That's including slewing, autofocus, meridain flip, dithering, filter changes and so on.
That's good data to know...
Médéric Hébert:
To anyone using my data, please send me your results, I'd like to see what can be done out of it, I know it's not great data and I'm not the best at post processing but I'd like to see how far it can go
@Médéric Hébert Here is my quick try,
palette is SHO with RGB stars, processed with PI and PS:
P.S. MGC is really a great tool; the RGB had a gradient that GC was not removing - MGC removed it very well (I cared about the gradient originally because I was thinking I could merge the starless RGB with the SHO, but the RGB starless was not a helpful addition - I left it out)