Etc Carina, an old fav but first image with this camera gear

OK
5 x 30 sec exp stacked in DSS, 2500 ISO, f5.6, 100-400 IS USM @ 400mm on a 5D3
The camera and lens were piggybacked on to of my Celestron CPC 925

I'm having lots of battles with DSS and PS when it comes to this style of PP ... big learning curve CC welcome
I would have preferred to have seen more red in the nebulosity

cheers
Dave

Looks good to me. I like the purples
Mine tend to come out the same.
Will be revisiting it soon as it's rising over my roof again

Desertraptor wrote in post #17387821
Looks good to me. I like the purples
Mine tend to come out the same.
Will be revisiting it soon as it's rising over my roof again

Greetings Peter

will look forward to seeing your results
I enjoy seeing your work.

here's a comparison ... just a single frame, you can see there is much more deeper red in it, that has been lost after stacking
I'm really struggling with getting the colours correct with the DSS curves adj.

cheers
Dave

PS. am not too worried about the slight star movement ... with the scope mount in AltAz mode ( I don't have a wedge) and so close to the SCP a little movement is inevitable

Looking much like mine now. Of course don't make me right. Colour is as much your preference as anything. I just like to keep colours as balanced as I can. I think having RGB balanced is how it should be but that's just my opinion

Dave:
Why is that your highlights are so much suppressed?
Emission clouds are not showing up.

Desertraptor wrote in post #17388608
Looking much like mine now. Of course don't make me right. Colour is as much your preference as anything. I just like to keep colours as balanced as I can. I think having RGB balanced is how it should be but that's just my opinion

Agree, I really want to keep objects looking as natural as possible ... I cant stand gaudy colours unless its specifically posted as an artistic rendering

Hi Samsen,
which pic are you referring to ?
if pic 2 .... that is just a single 30 sec frame SOOC no processing other than resizing for the forum ... note the deeper reder colour in it that is absent from the 5 x 30 sec stacked image

cheers
Dave

Processing will be radically different according to what you're after. If pure aesthetics is your aim, you can do anything - even mess with it so much you won't know what you started with. That's for the artsy types.

At the other extreme, you can try to scientifically measure some thing or another (apparent movement of an asteroid/comet in relation to the stars, the variation in luminosity of a variable star, etc), and you'll only focus on that particular data set while keeping other parameters from interfering with it. This is when you get ugly, black and white images full of grain and badly framed - but scientifically relevant.

Normal people, on the other hand (which are at least 4 crazy on a 1-10 scale, since they do astrophoto), will generally try to stretch their image to its maximum potential, keeping in mind its inherent limitations as a function of exposure, glass quality, sensor, light pollution, seeing and tracking. Processing skills are important - I know because I suck at it.

To this day, I consider my very first astrophoto as the best one yet - the result is crazy given the fact I had no idea what I was doing with my primitive gear, out the window above a radiator and through city lights. I did much better then than on many nights now with my current fancy tech.

[QUOTE=ecce_lex;174037​47]Processing will be radically different according to what you're after. If pure aesthetics is your aim, you can do anything - even mess with it so much you won't know what you started with. That's for the artsy types.

At the other extreme, you can try to scientifically measure some thing or another (apparent movement of an asteroid/comet in relation to the stars, the variation in luminosity of a variable star, etc), and you'll only focus on that particular data set while keeping other parameters from interfering with it. This is when you get ugly, black and white images full of grain and badly framed - but scientifically relevant.

Normal people, on the other hand (which are at least 4 crazy on a 1-10 scale, since they do astrophoto), will generally try to stretch their image to its maximum potential, keeping in mind its inherent limitations as a function of exposure, glass quality, sensor, light pollution, seeing and tracking. Processing skills are important - I know because I suck at it.

To this day, I consider my very first astrophoto as the best one yet - the result is crazy given the fact I had no idea what I was doing with my primitive gear, out the window above a radiator and through city lights. I did much better then than on many nights now with my current fancy tech.


Hi ecce_lex
thanks for chiming in

I agree with your comments
for me, I prefer the "as natural as possible" look (Then there's those that will ask ... What is that look?)
I have seen some pretty over the top saturation of some images around the net. And if they like that artistic look,
then awesome, just don't try and convince people that it is anything close to reality


to answer samsen's comment ....

that will mainly be because of the IR filter on the 5D3 and most other modern DSLR's and hence why
people buy/or get older Canons modd'ed to remove the filter
The reds that I know are in this nebula would leap out if it wasn't for that filter. It really hits the Ha hard

I come from a long history of film astrophotography ... the fave film my mate and I would use was hypered ( hypersensitised) Konica 3200
it gave nice colour and the hypering overcame some of the reciprocity failure that all film was susceptible to

Dave