0.00
#... |
|---|
|
I am looking for some critical feedback on my final image of Rosette Nebula and my processing. There is both a HSO and SHO version in the AstroBin link. https://www.astrobin.com/agrjch My workflow is AstroPixel Processor, with additional balancing such as curves and color in Photoshop. I like the "simplicity" of these two programs and feel that I get good results. At the same time, the defacto standard is PixInsight. I demoed this program some time ago and really disliked it. I guess my question though, is based on the result how much do experts in PI really think I am missing out? Thanks for looking. |
6.02
#... |
|---|
|
Hi, Very brave of you to submit an image for RCC! I do not think that I am a Pixinsight expert but I do believe that is the most potent software available for astro-imaging processing. There are a lot of tutorials regarding PI suggested workflow which a new user can find very helpful. Simplicity is not a characteristic of PI though. On the contrary, PI approach is not a few clicks solution but rather a lot of small and careful adjustments in stretching, noise control and sharpening tools, combined with several masking techniques. This subtle approach seems to benefit rich data images. Regarding your submitted image, I believe you have rich enough data to improve it. The most important think I see is the very dark background which is too dark for my taste: By clipping the darkest shades you are loosing the faint details and nebulosity and the image has an unusual and unnatural contrast. The star size and shape looks good but the clipping mentioned earlier has cause them to look like white blobs, with no colours or tonal scales. I hope these comments were helpful :-) CS Andreas |
10.84
#...
·
1
like
|
|---|
|
Hi there! First, let me say that it's a pretty nice image. I agree with Andreas: I too noticed that the background is a little dark, which strips you of some of the faint details. I normally shoot for a mean background value around 30-35 out of 255 in all 3 channels, but there is latitude for personal taste here. I would also say that your image may benefit from using Starnet++ to remove the stars before you've finished stretching the data. This lets you keep them more as points of light with a gentle fall-off from the center, rather than circles of even brightness. Overall, though, it's a very pleasing image. Well done! Damien |
|
0.00
#...
·
2
likes
|
|---|
|
Thank you both for the comments. I may give PI another try to see how the results differ, especially on the Starnet part. As far as the clipping, that was definitely a personal taste part that I did. I will need to test balancing how dark the background is vs the start clipping though. Thanks again! |
