AstronomyUkraine Posted May 7, 2021 Share Posted May 7, 2021 While my mount is out of action for a few weeks, I decided to reprocess some old data taken last year, using dynamic narrowband combinations found here. The process requires the SHO data to be stretched before combining, then continue with your normal workflow. The result is pretty impressive as you can see below. The final image was obtained combining a normal SHO combination, and the dynamic combination. I used a 50/50 mix in Pixelmath. The top image is a normal SHO combination, the second image is the SHO/dynamic SHO combination. 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Carastro Posted May 7, 2021 Share Posted May 7, 2021 Big difference, I must confess I do stretch my Ha, Oiii, and Sii separately before combining, mainly because they are so much fainter than Ha and need different amounts of stretching. They are both nice, but the 2nd one certainly has a lot more detail. Carole Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AstronomyUkraine Posted May 7, 2021 Author Share Posted May 7, 2021 8 minutes ago, Carastro said: Big difference, I must confess I do stretch my Ha, Oiii, and Sii separately before combining, mainly because they are so much fainter than Ha and need different amounts of stretching. They are both nice, but the 2nd one certainly has a lot more detail. Carole Thanks Carole. I used a new workflow on these stacks, I removed the noise before stretching, which I never do normally and also used the Ha data as luminance for the extra detail. I prefer the second one myself, the colour is a lot richer, and has a lot more depth to it. Brian Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jkulin Posted May 7, 2021 Share Posted May 7, 2021 Lovely image and details Brian Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AstronomyUkraine Posted May 7, 2021 Author Share Posted May 7, 2021 1 minute ago, Jkulin said: Lovely image and details Brian Thanks John. I tried out Ez Denoise and EZ Decon on this image. Both produced excellent results, and far easier and quicker than using the conventional methods. The Ez Denoise in particular, did a fantastic job, although I did use a little bit of ACDNR later in the process after curve adjustments. Brian Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TerryMcK Posted May 7, 2021 Share Posted May 7, 2021 #2 for me Brian. Superb processing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AstronomyUkraine Posted May 7, 2021 Author Share Posted May 7, 2021 3 minutes ago, TerryMcK said: #2 for me Brian. Superb processing. Thanks Terry. No2 for me also. This is a great method for combining SHO or HOO data. Just wish I had found it sooner. Brian Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Carastro Posted May 7, 2021 Share Posted May 7, 2021 2 hours ago, AstronomyUkraine said: and also used the Ha data as luminance for the extra detail. I prefer the second one myself, the colour is a lot richer, and has a lot more depth to it. Brian Yes I do that too. Carole 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jkulin Posted May 7, 2021 Share Posted May 7, 2021 2 hours ago, AstronomyUkraine said: Thanks John. I tried out Ez Denoise and EZ Decon on this image. Both produced excellent results, and far easier and quicker than using the conventional methods. The Ez Denoise in particular, did a fantastic job, although I did use a little bit of ACDNR later in the process after curve adjustments. Brian Yep Brian, I use the EZ tools a lot and the star reduction algorithms were created by Adam Block. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MarkAR Posted May 8, 2021 Share Posted May 8, 2021 Wow, big difference. I actually like both equally, they show different moods to the image. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AstronomyUkraine Posted May 8, 2021 Author Share Posted May 8, 2021 2 hours ago, MarkAR said: Wow, big difference. I actually like both equally, they show different moods to the image. This technique certainly makes a difference to the normal SHO combination. Going to try it on a HOO image to see if it improves those too. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AstronomyUkraine Posted May 8, 2021 Author Share Posted May 8, 2021 (edited) This is the same dynamic combination process used on HOO data. The PixelMath formula is different, but the processing is exactly the same. Instead of mixing the HOO and dynamic HOO in a 50/50 mix, this combination was 30/70. The top image is the usual HOO combination. The second image is the HOO/dynamic HOO mix. The most startling difference, besides the colour, is the amount of detail in the second image compared to the first one. The background nebulosity is also more prominent. Edited May 8, 2021 by AstronomyUkraine 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MarkAR Posted May 9, 2021 Share Posted May 9, 2021 Amazing difference. It's almost like the first image has discarded much of the nebulosity as noise. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AstronomyUkraine Posted May 9, 2021 Author Share Posted May 9, 2021 1 hour ago, MarkAR said: Amazing difference. It's almost like the first image has discarded much of the nebulosity as noise. I was amazed myself, and both images had the same simple stretch with STF and HistogramTransformation. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.