Come join the friendliest, most engaging and inclusive astronomy forum geared for beginners and advanced telescope users, astrophotography devotees, plus check out our "Astro" goods vendors.
Come join the friendliest, most engaging and inclusive astronomy forum geared for beginners and advanced telescope users, astrophotography devotees, plus check out our "Astro" goods vendors.
I am trying to figure out how much of the atmosphere to show on the limb
I think I rushed the processing yesterday too much and didn't take the time to try to do it right.
Here are 3 different amounts of atmosphere showing. I personally like the 3rd one with the least chromosphere on the edge, although the 2nd one is also pretty good to me.
I don't do this for scientific purposed but to please myself. I personally like the least amount of the atmosphere showing but still showing it. Others, especially someone I correspond with on another forum (he is on CN and POTN) like a lot of atmosphere and insist that you should not do separate images of the surface and the proms but do one and then use PS to coax out the proms. I prefer to shoot the surface and proms separately process them separately and then combine them in PS. I think it kind of comes down to what I like as I am shooting for myself and friends not for scientific purposes or for sales.
of these 3 what do people think of the different edges?
I might not always be right but I am never wrong, once I thought I was wrong, but I was mistaken...
Ferengi Rule of Acquisition #59 Free advice is seldom cheap
"Sometimes having is not so pleasing as wanting, it's not logical but it is true"
Commander Spock
Canon DSLR's R7, R6II, 5D, 7D2, 90D 21 lenses incl. 100-400L mk ii, 70-200L mk iii f/2.8, RF600/11
Lunt LS50 DS, LS80 DS, Lunt 102ED, Stellarvue SV80 APO, Orion ST80, 127 MAK, Skywatcher Evostar 120ED, 102 MAK, Celestron 8" Edge HD, 102AZ
Skywatcher EQ6-R Pro
ZWO ASI071MC-cool, ASI174mm, ASI174mm-cool, ASI178MC-cool, ASI290 mini, ASI120MM-S, ASI120MC Revolution Player One mm (178 chip)
In my opinion #3 is my favorite. It appears to give just a bit more detail of what's happening on the surface.
Gordon
Scopes: Explore Scientific ED80CF, Skywatcher 200 Quattro Imaging Newt, SeeStar S50 for EAA.
Mounts: Orion Atlas EQ-g mount & Skywatcher EQ5 Pro.
ZWO mini guider.
Image cameras: ZWO ASI1600 MM Cool, ZWO ASI533mc-Pro, ZWO ASI174mm-C (for use with my Quark chromosphere), ZWO ASI120MC
Filters: LRGB, Ha 7nm, O-III 7nm, S-II 7nm
Eyepieces: a few.
Primary software: Cartes du Ciel, N.I.N.A, StarTools V1.4.
Gordon wrote: ↑Sat Nov 06, 2021 5:42 pm
In my opinion #3 is my favorite. It appears to give just a bit more detail of what's happening on the surface.
I should have mentioned that the images are all the same image and the same surface, the only thing I changed was the amount of the chromosphere on the limb that shows by moving the surface closer to the edge.
But it does make everything look better
I might not always be right but I am never wrong, once I thought I was wrong, but I was mistaken...
Ferengi Rule of Acquisition #59 Free advice is seldom cheap
"Sometimes having is not so pleasing as wanting, it's not logical but it is true"
Commander Spock
Canon DSLR's R7, R6II, 5D, 7D2, 90D 21 lenses incl. 100-400L mk ii, 70-200L mk iii f/2.8, RF600/11
Lunt LS50 DS, LS80 DS, Lunt 102ED, Stellarvue SV80 APO, Orion ST80, 127 MAK, Skywatcher Evostar 120ED, 102 MAK, Celestron 8" Edge HD, 102AZ
Skywatcher EQ6-R Pro
ZWO ASI071MC-cool, ASI174mm, ASI174mm-cool, ASI178MC-cool, ASI290 mini, ASI120MM-S, ASI120MC Revolution Player One mm (178 chip)
