Update:
Gowri was so nice to pass her stacked images to me (thank you so much Gowri!). A look at them was really revealing a lot, just telling that judging an image is very complicated and that the reason of some of the "insufficiencies" that we try to explain can have many reasons.
One of the "insufficiencies" that I was referring to was that the image was too washed out and that some details were not crisp enough, and that this might be caused by applying noise reduction routines too heavily. I believe that I could not have been more wrong. Here the raw stacked image of Gowri's Hα channel compared to the star aligned image taken by me 1.5 months ago.

Both images are just STF Auto Stretched, no other processing done.
2 facts pop up right away: The number of stars and the sharpness of Gowri's image is significantly less. Meaning that the processed image could not be as sharp as I thought it could have been. Yes, one can do some sharpening routines, but those are limited and cannot compete with a sharper image obtained first hand.
OIII channel comparison:

Just confirming the seen artifacts of the Hα channel. SII looks identically.
What could be the reason?
I believe (but cannot be sure without further test images) that the 3nm filters play a role about the signal (which would make sense) compared to my used one of 10/8nm and the different sizes of the telescopes (TAK 76 compared to WO 132). On the other hand: Gowri took 3 min exposures, while I used 2 minutes. Bortle class same as 6. Maybe moon impact? Guiding looked sufficiently good for me, hence I do not think that this could be the reason.
All in all, I think Gowri processed her images very well and made a wonderful SHO image out of it!
Hope this information helps also others!
Uwe