1.43
#...
·
·
2
likes
|
|---|
| Date Taken: 5/2/24 Conditions: Bortle 6-7 (Long Island); moon 31.15% illuminated (Waning Crescent); below average seeing Total Integration Time: 4h 5m Main Scope: Askar 120 APO triplet refractor (with 1x flattener native at F/7) Mount: ZWO AM5 Camera: ASI2600MC Pro Filter: Optolong L-Pro Guide camera: ZWO 120mm Mini Guide scope: F4 30mm I forgot the name of Auto-focusing: ZWO EAF Computer: ASIAIR Plus Image settings: 300s exposures, Gain 100, -10C temp, Bin1 Guide exposures: 1s Dither: Every 5 subs Image calibration: 60 Darks, 60 Flats (LED display), 80 Bias Image Processing: All in PixInsight in approximately this order: WBPP with 1 x drizzle (max settings); SPCC, SCNR (80%), BlurXTerminator, NoiseXTerminator, DynamicCrop, GHS, linear stretch, GHS on galaxy mask, boost saturation curve I could do Graxpert or DBE and also do a star mask to edit them separately but I'm waiting on more data to come in before I really try hard on this (I'm shooting for 20h). Is this general editing direction working or do you suggest trying something else? And I know nothing replaces a dark sky location but that is a rare treat for me. Thanks guys!! Cheers, J  |
6.89
#...
·
·
1
like
|
|---|
|
Background extraction is necessary right after stacking IMHO, because you have to remove the additive component that is the background before engaging in a multiplicative modification that is color calibration. It will also reduce the need for SCNR (which results in a pervasive purple-blueish cast) and give you less bloated stars. That said, your detail, star shape and overall noise levels are very good. Especially for such a tricky target. |
6.05
#...
·
·
1
like
|
|---|
|
I agree with @dkamen with his analysis. Always after stacking do a light crop to remove any overlap from the stacking process. Then do your gradient removal. The new PI Gradient Correction tool is easy to use and is effective. Then proceed with your workflow. Off to a great start, would like to see new versions of this image as you receive feedback and incorporate it into this image. Of course, more data is always a good thing, but I think you have enough to deliver a nice result. CS Tim |
15.85
#...
·
·
1
like
|
|---|
|
Agree with the above, and I’ll add that if you zoom in and look at your background you’ll see that is has that heavy saturation appearance to it. The gradient removal will help with that but once thats done you can always create a mask and invert it and pull the saturation down on the background. Over all I think you did a great job on this one! I’ve shot this as well a couple different times thru the data collection I processed the data and each time I added data it really helped out. Even just 2-3hrs of additional data makes a difference. Dale |
