I am always seeking ways to improve my images and would appreciate any on this one.
https://astrob.in/o9kt61/0/
Thanks,
Stan
https://astrob.in/o9kt61/0/
Thanks,
Stan
[RCC] Looking for advice/help
![[deleted]](/assets/images/default-avatar.jpeg?v=2){kind=avatar}
Stan,
Thank you for sharing your image which I think does a fine job highlighting the nebulosity in this area.
The biggest area for improvement I see is the heavy use of noise reduction which has resulted in a loss of detail in the Tulip as well as soft transitions in the surrounding nebulosity. I suspect at least part of the reason is the relatively short integration time. I have imaged extensively with the SVX080T both with and without the .8 reducer and it is a very nice scope. However, it is still only a small refractor. I generally found that I needed ~ 8 hours of integration per channel for my NB images (more for fainter features like the OIII shell of the Crescent or the wispy OIII trails of the California Nebula). Doing this may result in a more detailed and sharper image as well as better vibrancy due to better color information gathered from the weaker channels.
Hope this is helpful. Clear skies,
Arun
Thank you for sharing your image which I think does a fine job highlighting the nebulosity in this area.
The biggest area for improvement I see is the heavy use of noise reduction which has resulted in a loss of detail in the Tulip as well as soft transitions in the surrounding nebulosity. I suspect at least part of the reason is the relatively short integration time. I have imaged extensively with the SVX080T both with and without the .8 reducer and it is a very nice scope. However, it is still only a small refractor. I generally found that I needed ~ 8 hours of integration per channel for my NB images (more for fainter features like the OIII shell of the Crescent or the wispy OIII trails of the California Nebula). Doing this may result in a more detailed and sharper image as well as better vibrancy due to better color information gathered from the weaker channels.
Hope this is helpful. Clear skies,
Arun
Well Written Helpful Insightful Respectful Engaging Supportive
Stan,
Thank you for sharing your image which I think does a fine job highlighting the nebulosity in this area.
The biggest area for improvement I see is the heavy use of noise reduction which has resulted in a loss of detail in the Tulip as well as soft transitions in the surrounding nebulosity. I suspect at least part of the reason is the relatively short integration time. I have imaged extensively with the SVX080T both with and without the .8 reducer and it is a very nice scope. However, it is still only a small refractor. I generally found that I needed ~ 8 hours of integration per channel for my NB images (more for fainter features like the OIII shell of the Crescent or the wispy OIII trails of the California Nebula). Doing this may result in a more detailed and sharper image as well as better vibrancy due to better color information gathered from the weaker channels.
Hope this is helpful. Clear skies,
Arun
Thank you Arun. I will absolutely do this with all my images. Thanks for taking time to respond.
Stan
Well Written Respectful
Stan,
Thank you for sharing your image which I think does a fine job highlighting the nebulosity in this area.
The biggest area for improvement I see is the heavy use of noise reduction which has resulted in a loss of detail in the Tulip as well as soft transitions in the surrounding nebulosity. I suspect at least part of the reason is the relatively short integration time. I have imaged extensively with the SVX080T both with and without the .8 reducer and it is a very nice scope. However, it is still only a small refractor. I generally found that I needed ~ 8 hours of integration per channel for my NB images (more for fainter features like the OIII shell of the Crescent or the wispy OIII trails of the California Nebula). Doing this may result in a more detailed and sharper image as well as better vibrancy due to better color information gathered from the weaker channels.
Hope this is helpful. Clear skies,
Arun
I will gather more data on it as conditions permit.
Your images are superb btw!
Thanks,
Stan
Well Written Respectful
[RCC] I need help to improve my technique and keep learning
Hi everyone! My latest image is M101: https://www.astrobin.com/na7n09/ I am quite satisfied with the final result, but this is why I need to know what else is needed to create an even better image. Therefore, I would appreciate it if you could help m...
Seeks feedback on image improvement like the author; similar learning goals.
[RCC] M31 first attempt
Thank you for suggestions for improvement on my first deep sky image. Image M31
General request for image improvement advice; similar feedback-seeking approach.
[RCC] M42 The Orion Nebula
For the masters of the acquisition and processing I am seeking their honest feedback, other than the blown out core where I managed to eliminate the trapezium alltogether. https://www.astrobin.com/6v61k9/ I know that beauty is subjective but I am not...
Requests honest feedback on deep-sky object image; directly relevant to author's request.
Mosaic Workflows and Best Practices in Pixinsight
My last two images published on Astrobin are my first attempts at mosaics. I underestimated how difficult it came be to stick together panels and make the overall image look seamless. My first attempt was a 2 panel mosaic of Eta Carina and the Statue...
Discusses image processing workflows; relevant to improving astrophotography results.
Soft, dull stars in processing
Hello everyone! I have a quick question about processing stars in Pixinsight. If you have a look at my more recent images I've posted on Astrobin, a lot of my stars appear soft and doughy and also lack vibrant colours. I'm getting to a point ...
Addresses star processing in astrophotography; relevant to image improvement techniques.