I finally got round to imaging this object, and this is the first time I have attempted to combine Ha and OIII all in the same RGB image. I am not sure about blending the OIII with the two separate G and B channels - I simply placed the same amount of OIII in each, which made the whole thing a bit too green for my liking, but I did not know that until I had got further along in the processing, and by that stage I did not want to go back and redo it! I then did some adjusting later, and have got it a bit better, but maybe there is a formula or method of how to mix the OIII with the G and B channels better and get a better blue hue? Anyway, that fact, at present, eludes me, and I only have so much head space to manage these things. Thanks everyone and have a good day...
Pier 7 is a William Optics FLT132 F5.6 APO, with a QSI 660-WSG Mono CCD camera, all on a Paramount MX mount. I was able to use from the data provided, 24 reds, 23 blues, 20 greens and 12 Has, and 43 OIIIs, each at 5 minutes long exposure time, and thus an integration time of 10 hours and 10 minutes.
And a slightly brighter one for those who prefer such things...
Pier 7 is a William Optics FLT132 F5.6 APO, with a QSI 660-WSG Mono CCD camera, all on a Paramount MX mount. I was able to use from the data provided, 24 reds, 23 blues, 20 greens and 12 Has, and 43 OIIIs, each at 5 minutes long exposure time, and thus an integration time of 10 hours and 10 minutes.
And a slightly brighter one for those who prefer such things...
0
Undo
Votes
Hi Simon,
Hope this gave you more pleasure than grief when processing.
I personally prefer pastel like images on nebulae such as these, gives a real sense of mystery. Plus you've got pleasing colourful stars to top it off. That kind of makes a mockery of what I posted yesterday of the opposite side of the Veil complex. Trying too hard to bring out details and totally overprocessed it as a result. Slightly toned down version to follow. A nice balance and another one to be proud of.
I am probably misunderstanding you when you talked about blending as I'm sure you already know what I show below, hoisted from part of a thread by Shane with regard to his Ngc7000 image. I found this so so useful. If I have misunderstood then maybe another member will supply an answer.
Looks like you've posted another image, which I'll resist looking at for now.
Great to hear from you again Simon.,
Best wishes,
Ray
Hope this gave you more pleasure than grief when processing.
I personally prefer pastel like images on nebulae such as these, gives a real sense of mystery. Plus you've got pleasing colourful stars to top it off. That kind of makes a mockery of what I posted yesterday of the opposite side of the Veil complex. Trying too hard to bring out details and totally overprocessed it as a result. Slightly toned down version to follow. A nice balance and another one to be proud of.
I am probably misunderstanding you when you talked about blending as I'm sure you already know what I show below, hoisted from part of a thread by Shane with regard to his Ngc7000 image. I found this so so useful. If I have misunderstood then maybe another member will supply an answer.
Looks like you've posted another image, which I'll resist looking at for now.
Great to hear from you again Simon.,
Best wishes,
Ray
0
Undo
Votes
[size=100]Morning Ray,
I would like to say that this gave me less grief... but it did!! Actually, I was working on it late last night, but in itself it was not too bad. I am glad you like the pastel version of this, and thanks so much for your support! : ) I have a bit of a dilemma with images and it fits with what you have said too...
I have always tried to process them in such a way, that they might look something like they would if I was standing actually in front of them. I am cautious with saturation and overly sharpening and processing things, because I feel it can create a garish unnatural look, and at the same time make the background noisy. It can make the object look as though it has been stuck onto the sky/background, rather than sort of emerging from it. Doing so may make them stand out more, but I do not want to do that for the sake of loss in other ways. I have no idea if this is the right thing to do, but what I have done here is include a slightly more sharpened and saturated look to see what you and others may think - image number 3! The other thing is I have a high quality monitor, and so I may be able to see things better on that compared to other monitors and it might be brighter too. I will look into what Shane wrote, thanks!
Honestly, Ray, I thought you images from yesterday were really good. You have battled a lot lately with this processing business and you have done really well with it, we are only talking about tweaks and things. I guess we all need to take a bit more of a joy in what we are producing.
All the best.
Simon
[/size]
I would like to say that this gave me less grief... but it did!! Actually, I was working on it late last night, but in itself it was not too bad. I am glad you like the pastel version of this, and thanks so much for your support! : ) I have a bit of a dilemma with images and it fits with what you have said too...
I have always tried to process them in such a way, that they might look something like they would if I was standing actually in front of them. I am cautious with saturation and overly sharpening and processing things, because I feel it can create a garish unnatural look, and at the same time make the background noisy. It can make the object look as though it has been stuck onto the sky/background, rather than sort of emerging from it. Doing so may make them stand out more, but I do not want to do that for the sake of loss in other ways. I have no idea if this is the right thing to do, but what I have done here is include a slightly more sharpened and saturated look to see what you and others may think - image number 3! The other thing is I have a high quality monitor, and so I may be able to see things better on that compared to other monitors and it might be brighter too. I will look into what Shane wrote, thanks!
Honestly, Ray, I thought you images from yesterday were really good. You have battled a lot lately with this processing business and you have done really well with it, we are only talking about tweaks and things. I guess we all need to take a bit more of a joy in what we are producing.
All the best.
Simon
[/size]
0
Undo
Votes
[size=100]Morning Ray,
I would like to say that this gave me less grief... but it did!! Actually, I was working on it late last night, but in itself it was not too bad. I am glad you like the pastel version of this, and thanks so much for your support! : ) I have a bit of a dilemma with images and it fits with what you have said too...
I have always tried to process them in such a way, that they might look something like they would if I was standing actually in front of them. I am cautious with saturation and overly sharpening and processing things, because I feel it can create a garish unnatural look, and at the same time make the background noisy. It can make the object look as though it has been stuck onto the sky/background, rather than sort of emerging from it. Doing so may make them stand out more, but I do not want to do that for the sake of loss in other ways. I have no idea if this is the right thing to do, but what I have done here is include a slightly more sharpened and saturated look to see what you and others may think - image number 3! The other thing is I have a high quality monitor, and so I may be able to see things better on that compared to other monitors and it might be brighter too. I will look into what Shane wrote, thanks!
Honestly, Ray, I thought you images from yesterday were really good. You have battled a lot lately with this processing business and you have done really well with it, we are only talking about tweaks and things. I guess we all need to take a bit more of a joy in what we are producing.
All the best.
Simon
[attachment]NGC 6960 finalised4.png[/attachment]
[/size]
I would like to say that this gave me less grief... but it did!! Actually, I was working on it late last night, but in itself it was not too bad. I am glad you like the pastel version of this, and thanks so much for your support! : ) I have a bit of a dilemma with images and it fits with what you have said too...
I have always tried to process them in such a way, that they might look something like they would if I was standing actually in front of them. I am cautious with saturation and overly sharpening and processing things, because I feel it can create a garish unnatural look, and at the same time make the background noisy. It can make the object look as though it has been stuck onto the sky/background, rather than sort of emerging from it. Doing so may make them stand out more, but I do not want to do that for the sake of loss in other ways. I have no idea if this is the right thing to do, but what I have done here is include a slightly more sharpened and saturated look to see what you and others may think - image number 3! The other thing is I have a high quality monitor, and so I may be able to see things better on that compared to other monitors and it might be brighter too. I will look into what Shane wrote, thanks!
Honestly, Ray, I thought you images from yesterday were really good. You have battled a lot lately with this processing business and you have done really well with it, we are only talking about tweaks and things. I guess we all need to take a bit more of a joy in what we are producing.
All the best.
Simon
[attachment]NGC 6960 finalised4.png[/attachment]
[/size]
- Page :
- 1
There are no replies made for this post yet.
Be one of the first to reply to this post!
Be one of the first to reply to this post!
Proud to use
Resources
Company Details:
Roboscopes
802 Kingsbury Road
Birmingham
B24 9PS
United Kingdom
