StarTools

Thanks for your tips that are very important to continue improving the results.
Actually I have no interest in doing astrophotography, I prefer to discover all those that are within the magnitude 12 or less and know the history of each one accompanied with a photo as real as possible. One of the many planetary programs in the market gives me a figure of 1500 objects in the Northern Hemisphere, it would be physically impossible to photograph them all following the canons of the Astrophoto in a single life. The EAA helps a lot in this and I can take advantage of the few cloudless nights to photograph a few at a time.

One of the things that most obsess me is to get the most natural color possible and any advice on this subject I will thank you very much.

elpajare wrote:One of the things that most obsess me is to get the most natural color possible and any advice on this subject I will thank you very much.

Color rendition is very subjective for a number of reasons (starting with picking the "correct" white balance). Much depends on your goals and personal tastes. However, if the goal is to show coloring that can be compared between images, regardless of exposure time, stretching or gear used, your best bet is StarTools' Color Constancy mode;

This is an old post, but still explains well what Color Constancy is;

http://forum.startools.org/viewtopic.php?f=7&t=418

This will allow you to accurately demonstrate similarities of objects (including stars) in terms of chemical makeup or temperature.

Of course, all this assumes that nothing else has stretched the image or has meddled with the coloring in any way. You are using JPEGs, so I can't be sure that is the case here unfortunately.

It has helped and a lot.
This program is fantastic! and the attention to the user as well.