Jump to content
  • Join the online East Midlands astronomy club today!

    With active forums, two dark sites and a knowledgeable membership, East Midlands Stargazers has something for everyone.

Lunar 19/03/13


Perkil8r
 Share

Recommended Posts

The continuing saga of Mike's moon project.

 

 8571999651_4b69a8a533_b.jpg
190313 by Perkil8r, on Flickr

 

Canon 350d on 200p / eq5. 36 exposures from 45, 1/400th sec @ 800 iso

Stacked in Registax 5.1, Processed in Photoshop 5 cs extended.

 

Not quite sure I've done the processing quite right. Will have another play tomorrow.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nice saga ?

Pat

 

I'm aiming to try and capture every day of the lunar phases. So far I now have 4 that I am "happy" with. The grand finale will be a while coming though, first shot at that will be in 2017.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks all. Can't put my finger on it but I'm not as happy with it as I would like. I've been messing with it this afternoon but can't improve on this so far.


Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ahhhh.... you've brought the colour up a bit more if I'm not mistaken - nice improvement :)

 

Also on the full size (which I can't post at the minute due to Flickr playing silly beggars) I have managed to reduce some of the noise. Subtle changes, but I think I'm happy now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I ussed jpegs in the end mike and theres no noise in mine well not a lot i used iso 400 hundred ,i see you used 800 thats a little high for the moon ? Or was mine to low ?Pat

 

The noise only comes out when I sharpen the detail a bit too much. It's a fine line to tread.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't add colour, all I do is stretch the colour data that is there. I agree, life would be boring, I just thought I would enquire in a similar vain to that of your enquiry of why I feel the need to add colour.


Link to comment
Share on other sites

Stretching does not "add" anything, it just brings out what is there, it's no different to the methods that are used in DSO imaging, except it is a lot trickier to bring out the colour without introducing colour noise, and increasing the errors associated with the optics, hence I have to knock the Aqua colours right down, but that is also down to the filter I use on the camera. The WB setting makes no difference in RAW format BTW.


Link to comment
Share on other sites

No, that's because the moon has a lot of red on the surface. I colour balance the image to get everything equal so everything is as it should be as it were, then just stretch the colour as a whole, not one channel more than the other or anything, just all in one go, using colour match in PS. It's a bit like the saturation adjustment action but far less harsh. There are a few other steps obviously such as false luminence layers and high pass filters which help build the contrast and add depth to the craters etc.


 


I used to treat the moon differently to DSO's when it came to processing, but have found that if I do it gently I can actually treat it much the same as DSO's, what I do have to do though is make sure that the raw images are slightly under exposed to allow room for me to stretch them, otherwise everything would just get over saturated and blown out.


 


What I do need to start doing is bias frames. Although there are no hot pixels due to the heat, there are bad pixels due to bias noise, a lot of those are red, maybe that's what you are reffering to? I've not played with bias frames and Registax yet, but I fully intend to do so soon. I'm also planning to remove the filter from the camera to try and rid the images of the aqua hue so I don't have to try and process it out after, it's only laziness that has stopped me from doing so previously. I think that might make a difference, although it will mean starting again with respect to exposure settings. I'm also going to try a couple of different ISO settings on my next try, I want to see if it makes much of a difference to the image in any way, I rather suspect not given the very short exposure lengths though.


Link to comment
Share on other sites

The reason I say bias frames is because each pixel is like a bucket, not all of them are completely empty each time you take a shot so give false readings if you like, that is what bias frames should remove. I once had a go with a mosaic, couldn't get on with it, but I've seen a tutorial for doing them in photoshop where it does most of the work for you, so I might have another play one day.


Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.