It seems I return to this object every couple of years.  My 2021 attempt was a perfect example of getting focused on one feature and completely ignoring the image as a whole.  I cringe looking at it.  You can share my cringe here: https://www.astrobin.com/1tpg71/

My focus with this version is two-fold: first to take advantage of the strides we've made in processing technology - specifically BlurX and second, to display the lovely variations of the structures between the three narrowband channels.  The base data here is the same as I used in 2021 though with a completely different crop.  

The mix here is straight SHO with a linear fit to Ha being applied to the OIII and  SII.  Starless versions of each channel were mixed to and RGB image following the linear fit. After that an unlocked STF was applied small curves adjustments made to get the color where I wanted it.  The SII in this FOV is really detailed and strong so it supports the red channel well.  

I did not shoot RGB for stars so a separate narrowband mix was done only for the stars.  This used a dynamic NB blend since I like the star colors that result as opposed to the magenta we get with straight SHO stars.  The stars from this second blend were lifted with StarX and applied to the main SHO image with a screen blend.  This process also allows star sizes to be customized using curves adjustments while in the screen mode. 

The BlurX settings for this really surprised me.  This is the first object I recall where the default settings worked for me.  In fact, I upped the star reduction to .36 and ran the strength at near .9.  In all previous cases that would have resulted in sharpening worms and all sorts of artifacts.  Why the difference?  One possibility is that this was binned data.  The image scale was .61 and the FWHM was around 3 pixels.  Most of my other data has a FWHM around 5.5 pixels.  Another thought is that the AI may have been trained on this object and thus it is better at resolving it.  

What to do for 2025?  Having captured this data from California, getting it up near the Zenith from Chile would be a nice improvement. Possibly knocking .5" off the FWHM.  Beyond that, I'll wait and see what makes me cringe when I look back at this one a couple of years down the road