The Philosophy of Processing

Discuss how you are able to get those fantastic images!!!
Post Reply
User avatar
Greenman Great Britain
Local Group Ambassador
Articles: 0
Offline
Posts: 2296
Joined: Fri Sep 27, 2019 7:39 pm
4
Location: Nether Heyford, UK
Status:
Offline

TSS Awards Badges

TSS Photo of the Day

The Philosophy of Processing

#1

Post by Greenman »


Well, my philosophy follows. I thought I would always go for the most 'true' or accurate respresentation of a target. This was a inaccurate idea, all our images are so processed that none of them are real. So now it becomes subjective, which it is bound to be as AP is a branch of photography... So what do I want?

As realistic an image as possible even if it lacks impact.
An impactful image that will make people go wow, irrespective of its 'trueness'.
An artistic represenations with wistful beauty...

Well a combination of most of those would be nice. To be honest however, I want an image I like - after the time spent getting data, stacking and processing this needs to be my photo.

So what tools do I use, well a variety, as I look for solutions to each part of processing. Astropixel processor for stacking, croping and removing light pollution; mostly PixInsight for processing, but Star Tools for Galaxies (as it works well for me, and as you will see - I test in Star tools first to see if the data stands up); Denoising & shapening with Topaz Utilities; final tweaking in Affinity Photo.

That said I'm no expert in any one program, in the end I will take short cuts as I'm more of a photographer than I am a processor.

I have sat here for a few days looking at the Sadr region I processed in twenty minutes in with Star Tools, compared to one I produced with PixInsight in half a day. Very different images, but I like the Star Tools image better as a photographer, to me it is more intersting.

Feel free to discuss your methods or feeling on this subject, as I would be interested in a range of opinions.

RGB PI Image

ImageSadr_region_RGB_EZ_GHS2_2 by Tony Boutle, on Flickr

Star Tools (Optimised HDR)

ImageSadr region ST RGB by Tony Boutle, on Flickr
Cheers,

Tony.

Image

Smart Scope: Dwarf II - Club and outreach work.

AP Refractor: Altair 72EDF Deluxe F6;1x & 0.8 Flatteners; Antares Versascope 60mm finder. ASIAir Pro.Li battery pack for grab & go.

Celestron AVX Mount; X-cel LX eyepieces & Barlows 2x 3x, ZWO 2” Filter holder,

Cameras: main DSO ASI533MC; DSO guide ASI120MM; Planetary ASI224MC; DSLR Canon EOS100 stock.

Filters: Astronomik IR cut; Optolong L-Pro; Optolong L-Enhance.

Binoculars: Celestron 15 x 70.

Latitude: 52.219853
Longitude: -1.034471
Accuracy: 5 m
Bortle 4 site. https://maps.google.com/?q=52.21985,-1.03447

Image
User avatar
KathyNS Canada
Co-Administrator
Co-Administrator
Articles: 0
Online
Posts: 2584
Joined: Thu Apr 25, 2019 11:47 am
4
Location: Nova Scotia
Status:
Online

TSS Awards Badges

TSS Photo of the Day

Re: The Philosophy of Processimg

#2

Post by KathyNS »


I don't think I really have a philosophy of processing. I don't approve of outright alteration of what was in the field of view. I will do some manual editing of masks for use in image processing, but I won't erase or add anything in the image itself. I do use masks for some difficult images, though my preference is not to.

Mostly what I do is noise reduction, stretching, sharpening, and colour tuning. My narrowband palette preference is HOO, partly because it is the most realistic one, partly because I really like the colours I can get with it, and partly because I don't have an Sii filter.

I almost always process nebulae and stars separately. Most images benefit from different amounts of stretching of the stars and the nebula, plus I can sharpen the stars with minimal artifacts that way. It also allows me to use a different palette for the stars. While I like HOO for emission nebulae, stars still look best in RGB.

Most of my images take a couple of hours to process in PixInsight. There are about a dozen processes that I use frequently in PI. There are dozens more that I don't even know about. I will come back to an image if I think I can improve on it, often by adding more data.
Image
DSO AP: Orion 200mm f/4 Newtonian Astrograph; ATIK 383L+; EFW2 filter wheel; Astrodon Ha,Oiii,LRGB filters; KWIQ/QHY5 guide scope; Planetary AP: Celestron C-11; ZWO ASI120MC; Portable: Celestron C-8 on HEQ5 pro; C-90 on wedge; 20x80 binos; Etc: Canon 350D; Various EPs, etc. Obs: 8' Exploradome; iOptron CEM60 (pier); Helena Observatory (H2O) Astrobin
User avatar
jrkirkham United States of America
Orion Spur Ambassador
Articles: 0
Offline
Posts: 929
Joined: Fri Jun 07, 2019 12:37 am
4
Location: Illinois United States
Status:
Offline

TSS Awards Badges

TSS Photo of the Day

Re: The Philosophy of Processimg

#3

Post by jrkirkham »


I'm not very good yet, but I do have sort of a Philosophy of Processing. I try to do the best I can and always stretch and grow, but producing nice shots are secondary, or perhaps even in third place.

First, I want to learn more about astronomy. I like to work through the various Astronomical League observing programs. For the past year or two I have been focusing on our solar system. I haven't done many DSOs, but I have been having fun learning and my planetary pictures are getting better. I think my next project may be double stars. I won't expect those pictures to match any of my earlier pictures, but I do expect to learn about multiple stars and for my picture to improve. I will still take occasional DSO, Solar System, or nightscapes, but the bulk will just be stars for as long as it takes.

Second, I want to be humble enough to post even my poor pictures. When I first got on here I always tried to put my best foot forward and post pictures people might like. I didn't want anyone to know how far behind the curve I was. Somewhere along the way I realized that there is always someone more advanced or more of a novice than me. We grow by being real. If I post a good shot it shows my growth. If I show a bad shot it may encourage someone else who feels intimidated to post their real shots.

Third, I want to take others along the journey with me. I am one of those who posts all sorts of nature pics on Facebook and YouTube (birds, bees, landscapes, stars and flowers). I have a small group that follows my Facebook pictures everyday.

That's my personal philosophy of AP, it's all more in the process than in the product, and most of all, just having fun.
Rob
Telescopes: 50mm refractor, ED80 triplet, 90mm makcass, 10" dob, 8"SCT, 11"SCT
Mounts: Celestron CGX, Orion Sirius + several camera tripods
Cameras: Canon 6D, Canon 80D, ZWO-ASI120MC
Binoculars: 10x50, 12x60, 15x70, 25-125x80
Observatory: SkyShed POD XL3 + 8x12 warm room
AL Projects Completed: Lunar #645, Outreach #0280, Universe Sampler #93-T, Binocular Messier #871, Messier #2521, Messier Honorary #2521, Constellation Hunter Northern Skies #112, Planetary Transit Venus #1, Galileo #26, Outreach Stellar 0280, Meteor Regular #157, Solar System Telescopic #209-I, Observer Award #1
AL Projects Currently in Process: Double Stars, Comet, Lunar Evolution
User avatar
Gordon United States of America
Site Admin
Site Admin
Articles: 1037
Offline
Posts: 8270
Joined: Wed Apr 24, 2019 10:52 pm
4
Location: Cottonwood, AZ
Status:
Offline

TSS Awards Badges

TSS Photo of the Day

I Broke The Forum.

Re: The Philosophy of Processing

#4

Post by Gordon »


Image processing is very subjective. Each person has what THEY feel is the look they are trying to achieve. Using different color palates and combinations, different amounts of 'stretch', it's all in the eye of the one doing the processing.

IMHO as long as the targeted object is apparent, its a great image.

AP is a difficult task for anyone to learn, over the years I have tried many of the 'tools' and methods, I finally settled in on what seems to work best for me.
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.

Image
User avatar
Greenman Great Britain
Local Group Ambassador
Articles: 0
Offline
Posts: 2296
Joined: Fri Sep 27, 2019 7:39 pm
4
Location: Nether Heyford, UK
Status:
Offline

TSS Awards Badges

TSS Photo of the Day

Re: The Philosophy of Processimg

#5

Post by Greenman »


KathyNS wrote: Tue Aug 23, 2022 2:20 pm I almost always process nebulae and stars separately. Most images benefit from different amounts of stretching of the stars and the nebula, plus I can sharpen the stars with minimal artifacts that way. It also allows me to use a different palette for the stars. While I like HOO for emission nebulae, stars still look best in RGB.

Most of my images take a couple of hours to process in PixInsight. There are about a dozen processes that I use frequently in PI. There are dozens more that I don't even know about. I will come back to an image if I think I can improve on it, often by adding more data.

Thanks Kathy any artform is never finished, I like your ideas on spliting stars away from the target, as you saay they are very different beasts. Philosophy is probably the wrong word - approach is probably better. :lol:
Cheers,

Tony.

Image

Smart Scope: Dwarf II - Club and outreach work.

AP Refractor: Altair 72EDF Deluxe F6;1x & 0.8 Flatteners; Antares Versascope 60mm finder. ASIAir Pro.Li battery pack for grab & go.

Celestron AVX Mount; X-cel LX eyepieces & Barlows 2x 3x, ZWO 2” Filter holder,

Cameras: main DSO ASI533MC; DSO guide ASI120MM; Planetary ASI224MC; DSLR Canon EOS100 stock.

Filters: Astronomik IR cut; Optolong L-Pro; Optolong L-Enhance.

Binoculars: Celestron 15 x 70.

Latitude: 52.219853
Longitude: -1.034471
Accuracy: 5 m
Bortle 4 site. https://maps.google.com/?q=52.21985,-1.03447

Image
User avatar
bobharmony
Local Group Ambassador
Articles: 0
Offline
Posts: 2028
Joined: Sun May 12, 2019 1:11 pm
4
Location: Connecticut, US
Status:
Offline

TSS Photo of the Day

Re: The Philosophy of Processing

#6

Post by bobharmony »


My philosophy starts with an observation that camera sensors work differently than the eye does in their ability to capture and store long-exposure information. With that in mind I don't get tied up in the discussion that what we produce isn't real, I see it as the camera sensor just gives us a different dataset to work with.

My goal is to present what the sensor has captured without adding anything that isn't actually in the data to the finished product. I do like to push that raw data to get as much detail and color out of it as possible, so will go a bit further than most in post-processing. If there is dustiness or IFN or some other faint signal hiding in the data I try to present it in the finished object.

Tools that I use include some sort of gradient removal and light pollution neutralization as I shoot from a very bright area. I will take advantage of deconvolution to build back data that is blurred by my optics and will use noise reduction to limit the impact of quantum variance of the sensor readouts. I use calibration frames to remove effects of vignetting and fixed signal the camera generates. I dither to reduce the impact of walking noise from the sensor. I do long exposures to improve the SNR in the data and give me a stronger set of data to work with.

In short, I will use tools to get at as pure a signal as I can. Is it open to interpretation as to whether I am getting as close to the actual data recorded as possible - of course it is! This is a short synopsis of what my overall plan is while capturing and post-processing an image.

Bob
Last edited by bobharmony on Wed Aug 24, 2022 3:09 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Hardware: Celestron C6-N w/ Advanced GTmount, Baader MK iii CC, Orion ST-80, Canon 60D (unmodded), Nikon D5300 (modded), Orion SSAG
Software: BYE, APT, PHD2, DSS, PhotoShop CC 2020, StarTools, Cartes du Ciel, AstroTortilla

Image
User avatar
Greenman Great Britain
Local Group Ambassador
Articles: 0
Offline
Posts: 2296
Joined: Fri Sep 27, 2019 7:39 pm
4
Location: Nether Heyford, UK
Status:
Offline

TSS Awards Badges

TSS Photo of the Day

Re: The Philosophy of Processimg

#7

Post by Greenman »


jrkirkham wrote: Tue Aug 23, 2022 6:20 pm I'm not very good yet, but I do have sort of a Philosophy of Processing. I try to do the best I can and always stretch and grow, but producing nice shots are secondary, or perhaps even in third place.

First, I want to learn more about astronomy. I like to work through the various Astronomical League observing programs. For the past year or two I have been focusing on our solar system. I haven't done many DSOs, but I have been having fun learning and my planetary pictures are getting better. I think my next project may be double stars. I won't expect those pictures to match any of my earlier pictures, but I do expect to learn about multiple stars and for my picture to improve. I will still take occasional DSO, Solar System, or nightscapes, but the bulk will just be stars for as long as it takes.

Second, I want to be humble enough to post even my poor pictures. When I first got on here I always tried to put my best foot forward and post pictures people might like. I didn't want anyone to know how far behind the curve I was. Somewhere along the way I realized that there is always someone more advanced or more of a novice than me. We grow by being real. If I post a good shot it shows my growth. If I show a bad shot it may encourage someone else who feels intimidated to post their real shots.

Third, I want to take others along the journey with me. I am one of those who posts all sorts of nature pics on Facebook and YouTube (birds, bees, landscapes, stars and flowers). I have a small group that follows my Facebook pictures everyday.

That's my personal philosophy of AP, it's all more in the process than in the product, and most of all, just having fun.
Yo Rob,

AP is a good way of learning in my opinion I’m better at learning by osmosis, so as I image I recall information. Also I run a small Astronomy club in my Village, having to present once a month keeps the brain functioning. In the forum people are really supportive as you grow, and the encouragement along with inspiration from others work keeps the wheels turning.

Taking others along with you is a real source of fun. Yep, if it’s not fun there’s little point.
Cheers,

Tony.

Image

Smart Scope: Dwarf II - Club and outreach work.

AP Refractor: Altair 72EDF Deluxe F6;1x & 0.8 Flatteners; Antares Versascope 60mm finder. ASIAir Pro.Li battery pack for grab & go.

Celestron AVX Mount; X-cel LX eyepieces & Barlows 2x 3x, ZWO 2” Filter holder,

Cameras: main DSO ASI533MC; DSO guide ASI120MM; Planetary ASI224MC; DSLR Canon EOS100 stock.

Filters: Astronomik IR cut; Optolong L-Pro; Optolong L-Enhance.

Binoculars: Celestron 15 x 70.

Latitude: 52.219853
Longitude: -1.034471
Accuracy: 5 m
Bortle 4 site. https://maps.google.com/?q=52.21985,-1.03447

Image
User avatar
Greenman Great Britain
Local Group Ambassador
Articles: 0
Offline
Posts: 2296
Joined: Fri Sep 27, 2019 7:39 pm
4
Location: Nether Heyford, UK
Status:
Offline

TSS Awards Badges

TSS Photo of the Day

Re: The Philosophy of Processing

#8

Post by Greenman »


Gordon wrote: Tue Aug 23, 2022 6:37 pm Image processing is very subjective. Each person has what THEY feel is the look they are trying to achieve. Using different color palates and combinations, different amounts of 'stretch', it's all in the eye of the one doing the processing.

IMHO as long as the targeted object is apparent, its a great image.

AP is a difficult task for anyone to learn, over the years I have tried many of the 'tools' and methods, I finally settled in on what seems to work best for me.
You are right about the task being difficult, we choose to photograph things that are a long way away. We do this through a changeable atmosphere, and then we amplify a very weak signal to produce our final result. The impatient will not enjoy the learning curve, masochist’s on the other hand… As you say the images are personal, which is why we don’t simply look in a book (as suggested several times by my wife - books are cheaper on the whole than the next ‘must have’ piece of gear.
Cheers,

Tony.

Image

Smart Scope: Dwarf II - Club and outreach work.

AP Refractor: Altair 72EDF Deluxe F6;1x & 0.8 Flatteners; Antares Versascope 60mm finder. ASIAir Pro.Li battery pack for grab & go.

Celestron AVX Mount; X-cel LX eyepieces & Barlows 2x 3x, ZWO 2” Filter holder,

Cameras: main DSO ASI533MC; DSO guide ASI120MM; Planetary ASI224MC; DSLR Canon EOS100 stock.

Filters: Astronomik IR cut; Optolong L-Pro; Optolong L-Enhance.

Binoculars: Celestron 15 x 70.

Latitude: 52.219853
Longitude: -1.034471
Accuracy: 5 m
Bortle 4 site. https://maps.google.com/?q=52.21985,-1.03447

Image
User avatar
Greenman Great Britain
Local Group Ambassador
Articles: 0
Offline
Posts: 2296
Joined: Fri Sep 27, 2019 7:39 pm
4
Location: Nether Heyford, UK
Status:
Offline

TSS Awards Badges

TSS Photo of the Day

Re: The Philosophy of Processing

#9

Post by Greenman »


bobharmony wrote: Wed Aug 24, 2022 12:56 pm
My goal is to present what the sensor has captured without adding anything that isn't actually in the data to the finished product. I do like to push that raw data to get as much detail and color out of it as possible, so will go a bit further than most in post-processing. If there is dustiness or IFN or some other faint signal hiding in the data I try to present it in the finished object.

Tools that I use include some sort of gradient removal and light pollution neutralization as I shoot from a very bright area. I will take advantage of deconvolution to build back data that is blurred by my optics and will use noise reduction to limit the impact of quantum variance of the sensor readouts. I use calibration frames to remove effects of vignetting and fixed signal the camera generates. I dither to reduce the impact of walking noise from the sensor. I do long exposures to improve the SNR in the data and give me a stronger set of data to work with.

In short, I will use tools to get at as pure a signal as I can. Is it open to interpretation as to whether I am getting as close to the actual data recorded as possible - of course it is! This is a short synopsis of what my overall plan is while capturing and post-processing an image.

Bob
I like the approach, I fall a bit short of this currently as my desire to perfect the image is limited by my experience. That will come, but the waiting is a bit tiresome for me 8-) . Still it all comes to committing to the task and I’m too hooked to get away.

So here is the rub, I would like a program that automated as much as possible, but then the hobby would lose some of its appeal…

Is Solomon around somewhere? :D
Cheers,

Tony.

Image

Smart Scope: Dwarf II - Club and outreach work.

AP Refractor: Altair 72EDF Deluxe F6;1x & 0.8 Flatteners; Antares Versascope 60mm finder. ASIAir Pro.Li battery pack for grab & go.

Celestron AVX Mount; X-cel LX eyepieces & Barlows 2x 3x, ZWO 2” Filter holder,

Cameras: main DSO ASI533MC; DSO guide ASI120MM; Planetary ASI224MC; DSLR Canon EOS100 stock.

Filters: Astronomik IR cut; Optolong L-Pro; Optolong L-Enhance.

Binoculars: Celestron 15 x 70.

Latitude: 52.219853
Longitude: -1.034471
Accuracy: 5 m
Bortle 4 site. https://maps.google.com/?q=52.21985,-1.03447

Image
User avatar
bobharmony
Local Group Ambassador
Articles: 0
Offline
Posts: 2028
Joined: Sun May 12, 2019 1:11 pm
4
Location: Connecticut, US
Status:
Offline

TSS Photo of the Day

Re: The Philosophy of Processing

#10

Post by bobharmony »


Greenman wrote: Wed Aug 24, 2022 3:16 pm
I like the approach, I fall a bit short of this currently as my desire to perfect the image is limited by my experience. That will come, but the waiting is a bit tiresome for me 8-) . Still it all comes to committing to the task and I’m too hooked to get away.

So here is the rub, I would like a program that automated as much as possible, but then the hobby would lose some of its appeal…

Is Solomon around somewhere? :D
Solomon, indeed. For me, StarTools and APP are making a good combination lately. I use APP for calibration, stacking, and LP removal, then over to StarTools for post processing, with a touch of NXT at then end to clean things up.

I'm not sure the desire to "perfect" an image would be useful to me. Every time I finish a process, I get the feeling I left something that could be better. There is no perfect for me, just the best I can do at the moment.

Bob
Hardware: Celestron C6-N w/ Advanced GTmount, Baader MK iii CC, Orion ST-80, Canon 60D (unmodded), Nikon D5300 (modded), Orion SSAG
Software: BYE, APT, PHD2, DSS, PhotoShop CC 2020, StarTools, Cartes du Ciel, AstroTortilla

Image
User avatar
Jockinireland Ireland
Milky Way Ambassador
Articles: 0
Online
Posts: 1920
Joined: Sat Aug 24, 2019 7:56 pm
4
Location: Galway
Status:
Online

TSS Photo of the Day

Re: The Philosophy of Processing

#11

Post by Jockinireland »


This is a really interesting question.

For me, the final goal is to produce an image that will make the viewer stop and think about what they are seeing, make them think for a second about the vastness of space and the astonishing beauty that is out there. Make then ask what is that, how did it form, how big is it. But I want to do it without adding anything "artificial". This is where it becomes a bit difficult and subjective. As others have pointed out, the second we stretch data from linear we are already presenting something that is "not real". But then you could argue that our eyes/brains do a level of "image processing" constantly, by collecting photons on our retina, transforming that signal into data, which is then processed by our grey matter (possibly using a less complicated version of pixinsight :D ) and presented as an image in our minds eye.

So, my view is that I will uitilise whatever tools and processes are available to process the data to make it accessible to the viewer. I will tweak contrast, colour, noise, sharpness etc to make the image interesting, attractive enough to make the viewer stop and think about what they are looking at.

But I will stop short of adding anything that is not there. I will only remove things (other than artifacts from capture/processing ) from an image by cropping the image so the offending article is no longer in the image.

I especially dislike the current trend online, particularly on instagram etc, of animating AP images so it looks like a galaxy is spinning, or that the viewer is rushing through space at vast speeds with stars whizzing past in all directions. Those make me cringe. Ok, they have their place, and I'm sure some people love them, but they are not, in my view, astrophotography.

David
Scope: Skywatcher Evostar 80ED (SW 0.85 FR/FF) on a SW NEQ6Pro
Guiding; SW Evoguide 50ED, ASI 120mm mini
Meade 8" LX200 GPS on wedge (Guided with a cheapo 50mm guidescope and a ZWO ASI 120mm mini)
Sharpstar 61EDPH II (with dedicated 0.8 reducer) with wiliam Optics 32mm uniguide
Camera: ASI2600MC pro. QHY 163M with ZWO 7nm NB filters, Canon EOS700D astro mod
Secondary mount: Skywatcher StarAdventurer

My Astrobin https://www.astrobin.com/users/mackiedlm/
User avatar
yobbo89 Australia
Moderator
Moderator
Articles: 0
Offline
Posts: 2561
Joined: Sat May 11, 2019 7:44 pm
4
Location: australia qld brisbane
Status:
Offline

TSS Photo of the Day

Re: The Philosophy of Processing

#12

Post by yobbo89 »


subtle is really my main methode, so light whispy,dark shadows, i think it highlites chaos of the uinverse in a gentle way. much like paintings of ships at sea done in a smooth light palet, sometimes i'll use vibrant colours if there is a lot of oiii in the region .

some what like this painter

https://www.google.com/search?q=J.M.W.+ ... 57&dpr=1.1
scopes :gso/bintel f4 12"truss tube, bresser messier ar127s /skywatcher 10'' dob,meade 12'' f10 lx200 sct
cameras : asi 1600mm-c/asi1600mm-c,asi120mc,prostar lp guidecam, nikkon d60, sony a7,asi 290 mm
mounts : eq6 pro/eq8/mesu 200 v2
filters : 2'' astronomik lp/badder lrgb h-a,sII,oIII,h-b,Baader Solar Continuum, chroma 3nm ha,sii,oiii,nii,rgb,lowglow,uv/ir,Thousand Oaks Solar Filter,1.25'' #47 violet,pro planet 742 ir,pro planet 807 ir,pro planet 642 bp ir.
extras : skywatcher f4 aplanatic cc, Baader MPCC MKIII Coma Corrector,Orion Field Flattener,zwo 1.25''adc.starlight maxi 2" 9x filter wheel,tele vue 2x barlow .

Image
User avatar
Star Dad United States of America
Orion Spur Ambassador
Articles: 0
Offline
Posts: 744
Joined: Sat Aug 10, 2019 8:05 pm
4
Location: Norwich CT
Status:
Offline

TSS Awards Badges

Re: The Philosophy of Processing

#13

Post by Star Dad »


I try and keep my processing as simple as possible. Recently I move from using Nebulosity to Deep Sky Stacker to preprocess images. I am absolutely stunned by the difference in results. I use StarTools for post processing - using the same work flow and setting for both Nebulosity and DSS outputs, the DSS results in more vivid colors. I use "scientific" colors in ST as I want as close to realistic as possible - I'm not in favor of the Hubble Palette - unless there is some reason to enhance some frequency - which since I don't do any real "analysis" of objects is moot to me. But I say - do what makes you happy - after all it's your blood, sweat, and tears that are producing the image. So what if someone's image shows blue and yours show red? It's all literally in the eye of the beholder. :Astronomer1:
"To be good is not enough when you dream of being great"

Orion 203mm/f4.9/1000mm, converted TASCO 114mm/f9/1000mm to steam punk, Meade 114mm/f9/1000, Coronado PST, Orion EQ-G, Ioptron Mini-Tower and iEQ30, Canon 70D, ASI120MM,ASI294MC, Ioptron SkyHunter
User avatar
Greenman Great Britain
Local Group Ambassador
Articles: 0
Offline
Posts: 2296
Joined: Fri Sep 27, 2019 7:39 pm
4
Location: Nether Heyford, UK
Status:
Offline

TSS Awards Badges

TSS Photo of the Day

Re: The Philosophy of Processing

#14

Post by Greenman »


yobbo89 wrote: Tue Sep 06, 2022 2:15 pm subtle is really my main methode, so light whispy,dark shadows, i think it highlites chaos of the uinverse in a gentle way. much like paintings of ships at sea done in a smooth light palet, sometimes i'll use vibrant colours if there is a lot of oiii in the region .

some what like this painter

https://www.google.com/search?q=J.M.W.+ ... 57&dpr=1.1
I am a great fan of Turner and his use of light, so I totally get your drift. I would aspire to produce anything as delicate as one of his works. :D
Cheers,

Tony.

Image

Smart Scope: Dwarf II - Club and outreach work.

AP Refractor: Altair 72EDF Deluxe F6;1x & 0.8 Flatteners; Antares Versascope 60mm finder. ASIAir Pro.Li battery pack for grab & go.

Celestron AVX Mount; X-cel LX eyepieces & Barlows 2x 3x, ZWO 2” Filter holder,

Cameras: main DSO ASI533MC; DSO guide ASI120MM; Planetary ASI224MC; DSLR Canon EOS100 stock.

Filters: Astronomik IR cut; Optolong L-Pro; Optolong L-Enhance.

Binoculars: Celestron 15 x 70.

Latitude: 52.219853
Longitude: -1.034471
Accuracy: 5 m
Bortle 4 site. https://maps.google.com/?q=52.21985,-1.03447

Image
User avatar
Greenman Great Britain
Local Group Ambassador
Articles: 0
Offline
Posts: 2296
Joined: Fri Sep 27, 2019 7:39 pm
4
Location: Nether Heyford, UK
Status:
Offline

TSS Awards Badges

TSS Photo of the Day

Re: The Philosophy of Processing

#15

Post by Greenman »


Star Dad wrote: Tue Sep 06, 2022 2:19 pm I try and keep my processing as simple as possible. Recently I move from using Nebulosity to Deep Sky Stacker to preprocess images. I am absolutely stunned by the difference in results. I use StarTools for post processing - using the same work flow and setting for both Nebulosity and DSS outputs, the DSS results in more vivid colors. I use "scientific" colors in ST as I want as close to realistic as possible - I'm not in favor of the Hubble Palette - unless there is some reason to enhance some frequency - which since I don't do any real "analysis" of objects is moot to me. But I say - do what makes you happy - after all it's your blood, sweat, and tears that are producing the image. So what if someone's image shows blue and yours show red? It's all literally in the eye of the beholder. :Astronomer1:

Nice synopsis, I expect all of us take a similar approach, being a OTC user the Hubble pallett is not a natural for me. I can see how it brings out detail, and that is its main aim (at least I think it is :? ). Oddly we tend to be more critical of our own work than others do.
Cheers,

Tony.

Image

Smart Scope: Dwarf II - Club and outreach work.

AP Refractor: Altair 72EDF Deluxe F6;1x & 0.8 Flatteners; Antares Versascope 60mm finder. ASIAir Pro.Li battery pack for grab & go.

Celestron AVX Mount; X-cel LX eyepieces & Barlows 2x 3x, ZWO 2” Filter holder,

Cameras: main DSO ASI533MC; DSO guide ASI120MM; Planetary ASI224MC; DSLR Canon EOS100 stock.

Filters: Astronomik IR cut; Optolong L-Pro; Optolong L-Enhance.

Binoculars: Celestron 15 x 70.

Latitude: 52.219853
Longitude: -1.034471
Accuracy: 5 m
Bortle 4 site. https://maps.google.com/?q=52.21985,-1.03447

Image
User avatar
Greenman Great Britain
Local Group Ambassador
Articles: 0
Offline
Posts: 2296
Joined: Fri Sep 27, 2019 7:39 pm
4
Location: Nether Heyford, UK
Status:
Offline

TSS Awards Badges

TSS Photo of the Day

Re: The Philosophy of Processing

#16

Post by Greenman »


Jockinireland wrote: Tue Sep 06, 2022 8:39 am This is a really interesting question.

For me, the final goal is to produce an image that will make the viewer stop and think about what they are seeing, make them think for a second about the vastness of space and the astonishing beauty that is out there. Make then ask what is that, how did it form, how big is it. But I want to do it without adding anything "artificial". This is where it becomes a bit difficult and subjective. As others have pointed out, the second we stretch data from linear we are already presenting something that is "not real". But then you could argue that our eyes/brains do a level of "image processing" constantly, by collecting photons on our retina, transforming that signal into data, which is then processed by our grey matter (possibly using a less complicated version of pixinsight :D ) and presented as an image in our minds eye.

So, my view is that I will uitilise whatever tools and processes are available to process the data to make it accessible to the viewer. I will tweak contrast, colour, noise, sharpness etc to make the image interesting, attractive enough to make the viewer stop and think about what they are looking at.

But I will stop short of adding anything that is not there. I will only remove things (other than artifacts from capture/processing ) from an image by cropping the image so the offending article is no longer in the image.

I especially dislike the current trend online, particularly on instagram etc, of animating AP images so it looks like a galaxy is spinning, or that the viewer is rushing through space at vast speeds with stars whizzing past in all directions. Those make me cringe. Ok, they have their place, and I'm sure some people love them, but they are not, in my view, astrophotography.

David
Yes, I too have issues with 3D and 'Space' effects mainly as this misleads peoples expectation of what a telescope will do. I think a lot of this permeates out from the CGI used in major astronomy series. I understand the desire Brian Cox has in inspiring interest in space, but it can go close to disinformation. That can lead to big letdowns when people have a go though their own or a friends scope.

I would love to get people to stop looking down at the their phones and tablets and look up to the wonders above. Balancing reality and impact is a delicate task, as if AP wasn't a bit difficult itself. :roll:
Cheers,

Tony.

Image

Smart Scope: Dwarf II - Club and outreach work.

AP Refractor: Altair 72EDF Deluxe F6;1x & 0.8 Flatteners; Antares Versascope 60mm finder. ASIAir Pro.Li battery pack for grab & go.

Celestron AVX Mount; X-cel LX eyepieces & Barlows 2x 3x, ZWO 2” Filter holder,

Cameras: main DSO ASI533MC; DSO guide ASI120MM; Planetary ASI224MC; DSLR Canon EOS100 stock.

Filters: Astronomik IR cut; Optolong L-Pro; Optolong L-Enhance.

Binoculars: Celestron 15 x 70.

Latitude: 52.219853
Longitude: -1.034471
Accuracy: 5 m
Bortle 4 site. https://maps.google.com/?q=52.21985,-1.03447

Image
User avatar
Star Dad United States of America
Orion Spur Ambassador
Articles: 0
Offline
Posts: 744
Joined: Sat Aug 10, 2019 8:05 pm
4
Location: Norwich CT
Status:
Offline

TSS Awards Badges

Re: The Philosophy of Processing

#17

Post by Star Dad »


In genealogy, there is now an application that can take a photo and animate it. UGGH! They'll even add an audio clip "to bring your ancestor alive". :o That is just too creepy!
"To be good is not enough when you dream of being great"

Orion 203mm/f4.9/1000mm, converted TASCO 114mm/f9/1000mm to steam punk, Meade 114mm/f9/1000, Coronado PST, Orion EQ-G, Ioptron Mini-Tower and iEQ30, Canon 70D, ASI120MM,ASI294MC, Ioptron SkyHunter
User avatar
Greenman Great Britain
Local Group Ambassador
Articles: 0
Offline
Posts: 2296
Joined: Fri Sep 27, 2019 7:39 pm
4
Location: Nether Heyford, UK
Status:
Offline

TSS Awards Badges

TSS Photo of the Day

Re: The Philosophy of Processing

#18

Post by Greenman »


Star Dad wrote: Thu Sep 08, 2022 7:38 pm In genealogy, there is now an application that can take a photo and animate it. UGGH! They'll even add an audio clip "to bring your ancestor alive". :o That is just too creepy!
OMG - no thanks!
Cheers,

Tony.

Image

Smart Scope: Dwarf II - Club and outreach work.

AP Refractor: Altair 72EDF Deluxe F6;1x & 0.8 Flatteners; Antares Versascope 60mm finder. ASIAir Pro.Li battery pack for grab & go.

Celestron AVX Mount; X-cel LX eyepieces & Barlows 2x 3x, ZWO 2” Filter holder,

Cameras: main DSO ASI533MC; DSO guide ASI120MM; Planetary ASI224MC; DSLR Canon EOS100 stock.

Filters: Astronomik IR cut; Optolong L-Pro; Optolong L-Enhance.

Binoculars: Celestron 15 x 70.

Latitude: 52.219853
Longitude: -1.034471
Accuracy: 5 m
Bortle 4 site. https://maps.google.com/?q=52.21985,-1.03447

Image
User avatar
Petrol Great Britain
Jupiter Ambassador
Articles: 0
Offline
Posts: 208
Joined: Sun Jan 22, 2023 11:40 pm
1
Location: UK
Status:
Offline

TSS Photo of the Day

Re: The Philosophy of Processing

#19

Post by Petrol »


It's an interesting subject. AP can be very complicated and it's frustrated me in the past. I think it's fair to say many are looking for detail in an image but that can be difficult to achieve with the amount of light pollution most of us have to deal with. I started imagaing about 10 years ago and this was my first AP. 1 sub, SW 200p, Canon 1000D and a CLS filter. I didn't know what guiding or stacking was back then :mrgreen:


Image


Was I happy with it. Absolutely! I had a break from AP for 10 years but what struck me was how things had progressed. Narrowband filters for OSC cameras has made a monumental difference. Target framing is now easy with plate solving and then these's the advancement in processing software. It's become a science and an art but that doesn't make it easy. I saw a posted image and thought I could get more detail out of it, I tried and failed! It's all insanely complicated. I like looking at other peoples images because everyone has a different take, variety is good.
Personally I don't have a philosophy on processing because it's subjective. The main thing is that people are looking up and realising the vastness of it all. Nature is a very powerful force and I find it very humbling when I see astro images.

Clear skies
Pete
Rig1. Samyang 135 F2 ED UMC, Player One Poseidon-C Pro, EQ5
Rig2. Celestron RASA 8, Zwo Asi 533 MC Pro, EQ6
APM Astrograph 107/700, Hutech/Idas filters, NINA, Pix.
lots of cables!
User avatar
Greenman Great Britain
Local Group Ambassador
Articles: 0
Offline
Posts: 2296
Joined: Fri Sep 27, 2019 7:39 pm
4
Location: Nether Heyford, UK
Status:
Offline

TSS Awards Badges

TSS Photo of the Day

Re: The Philosophy of Processing

#20

Post by Greenman »


Hi Pete,
Petrol wrote: Fri Feb 17, 2023 3:51 pm The main thing is that people are looking up and realising the vastness of it all. Nature is a very powerful force and I find it very humbling when I see astro images.
I can't agree more - it also allows us to share this with others, who may never look up at our (rapidly disappearing) visual night sky.
Cheers,

Tony.

Image

Smart Scope: Dwarf II - Club and outreach work.

AP Refractor: Altair 72EDF Deluxe F6;1x & 0.8 Flatteners; Antares Versascope 60mm finder. ASIAir Pro.Li battery pack for grab & go.

Celestron AVX Mount; X-cel LX eyepieces & Barlows 2x 3x, ZWO 2” Filter holder,

Cameras: main DSO ASI533MC; DSO guide ASI120MM; Planetary ASI224MC; DSLR Canon EOS100 stock.

Filters: Astronomik IR cut; Optolong L-Pro; Optolong L-Enhance.

Binoculars: Celestron 15 x 70.

Latitude: 52.219853
Longitude: -1.034471
Accuracy: 5 m
Bortle 4 site. https://maps.google.com/?q=52.21985,-1.03447

Image
Post Reply

Create an account or sign in to join the discussion

You need to be a member in order to post a reply

Create an account

Not a member? register to join our community
Members can start their own topics & subscribe to topics
It’s free and only takes a minute

Register

Sign in

Return to “Image processing”