I explained my frustration with my image as compared to the other and he told me that I just needed to learn to process better. Please note- I knew my image was never going to win, I was super happy to finally make a top pick but know I still have a long way to go. I called someone who I knew had won several Image of the day awards on Astrobin and who was very familiar with the selection process. While reading down through the comments the imager admitted to using Topaz AI, I had never heard of it. I started reading through the notes and saw some very uncomplimentary comments about the image being over processed and fake. And how, just how could anyone get such sharp images from an earth based system? This made little sense to me, how after more than 90 hours of data could this imager have data from 20 hours showing tendrils, dust motes and other objects where I showed nothing at all. I began to look closer at the image and started noticing strange artifacts and even detail where I apparently had no data at all. I just would never be able to process that good and began questioning everything I had learned. I started to think that no matter if I set my system up in NM, which was already in the works, I would never be able to achieve the results like the winner had.
I began to look through other images of the same target and the other images that had won image of the day on this same target were very much like my image, I could still do a better job on deconvolution and touch up some other areas but all in all my image was comparable with the other image of the day winners unlike the newest which made mine look like a polaroid compared to a Sports Illustrated Swim Suit Edition photo. But the more I looked at the image of the day I knew that i would never be able to process any data to produce an image as sharp as the one that blew mine out of the water. After comparing my image with the image of the day I knew that I could never get that much detail from where Imaged no matter how many hours I put in, I needed to definitely complete my setup in NM. At the time I was imaging from a Bortle 4 and in the process of setting up a remote site in NM. The image of the day was such that it appeared the image was taken from someone floating in space just a few feet away. When I compared my image to the image of the day i was blown away. I do think i acquire exceptional data and painstakingly tweak my setup all the time to acquire the best data possible from my setups which makes my processing easier. I freely admit I am not a very good processor but am learning all the time. I had spent well over 90 hours imaging the target and culling subs. The same day it made it into the top picks the image of the day was the same target as mine. One of my images recently made it into the top picks category on Astrobin. I just re-load the same image twice for each separate process.Įdited by unimatrix0, 21 June 2021 - 10:03 AM. For example, sharpening the Whirlpool galaxy a bit, I mask it off then reverse mask, so the background and the stars doesn't receive any sharpening.Īnd I don't denoise + sharpen at the same time. Sharpening effect I only use with masking. I do extreme-zoom in while running my images in Topaz Denoise, and if I got tiny stars and they turn into triangles or just disappear, then I'm turning down the denoise feature.
I also do that, or more correctly done it and made some pictures with stuff like Terragen software.
Which I'm also a fan of people making artistic stuff and sci-fi things are 2nd favorite pictures, whether it's software painted or random generation with fractions bump mapping etc. I'm an "originalist" if there is such a term, meaning I rather have the noise and I don't mind looking at noisy images from others, it just feels original and real and not software generated. I use Denoise, but since I am no fan of the sharpening, It's always turned to minimum, while denoise is either half way or 1/3, because I also don't like making the the background look like chocolate pudding. Some people seems to be against/outraged, others welcome the option. I didn't read the whole thread, but I did read some.