Page 2 of 2
Re: IC 434 Horsey Test
Posted: Sun Feb 04, 2024 7:46 am
by fmeireso
It looks better to me , Mike.
To red, well the background seems a liitle reddish , then again maybe too subtle to mention. Great stars, Alnitak is extremely well controlled.
It is a riddle to me that Startools on some occasions does a tremenduous job with less effort for the user. My Alnitak at the time was not a good as yours but still very acceptable.
Re: IC 434 Horsey Test
Posted: Sun Feb 04, 2024 8:48 am
by Mike in Rancho
Hey Freddy thanks,
Well, I'm not sure there was less effort.
These NB Accent compositions take some fiddling, at least for me.
I came up with another interim edit, again playing around with a few things based on the other thread...and perhaps becoming too artsy. Oh noes!
I chose some different color/luminance modify options, which can change the blending quite a bit. So I ended up with a better-preserved and lighter Flame, IMO, but I had to reverse a lot of purple stars.
I forgot to use a little gamma adjust in NB Accent, so just did one at the end. Also fed back in a little equalized perceptual grain in denoise to keep the smoothing from being too harsh.
Mostly though I think just doubling up the time permits more choices here, but on this target the Ha can still be overwhelming. I could probably back the gamma off another notch or two here, at least against a dark border. With a bright border it's not as bad.
-
- IC434 LRGBHa ST9 6C 1600.jpg (574.78 KiB) Viewed 4380 times
Re: IC 434 Horsey Test
Posted: Sun Mar 31, 2024 6:56 am
by Mike in Rancho
Finalized my January horsey,
still the last astro data I've managed to capture this year.
I'm sure it looks pretty much just like all the others.
But,
I appreciated applying 565 and the new OptiDev to it. The stars are so much happier, deringing can just be deringing, and no weird hoops to jump through chasing illusory-yet-oh-so-real donuts.
Another seeming bonus, I didn't need to go masking tiny star rings (against nebulosity) all over the image. Yay! Must be something about the new curve points? There were a handful that still come in during SVD and escape deringing for whatever reason, but not all over the place. So minimal I didn't even bother with repairs.
I did have to go fix some "holes" I was getting in saturated star cores, but that one was around beforehand. I paid attention this time though, and they seem to be generated by Highlight Repair in Color. Will have to try to figure out what's up.
-
- HH LRGBHa 266m ST9newOD 11B 1600.jpg (592.31 KiB) Viewed 4026 times
Since I had something to upload, I finally renewed my AB. And my ST while I was at it.
https://astrob.in/zfxghk/0/
Re: IC 434 Horsey Test
Posted: Mon Apr 01, 2024 1:35 pm
by decay
Mike in Rancho wrote: ↑Sun Mar 31, 2024 6:56 am
And my ST while I was at it.
I just checked my ST licence and it already expired one month ago.
But latest beta works without hint and saving is possible as well ...
@Ivo - maybe your licence check does not work any more?
Just renewed as well - it's really only a symbolic price!
Dietmar.
Re: IC 434 Horsey Test
Posted: Mon Apr 01, 2024 5:40 pm
by Mike in Rancho
decay wrote: ↑Mon Apr 01, 2024 1:35 pm
Mike in Rancho wrote: ↑Sun Mar 31, 2024 6:56 am
And my ST while I was at it.
I just checked my ST licence and it already expired one month ago.
But latest beta works without hint and saving is possible as well ...
@Ivo - maybe your licence check does not work any more?
Just renewed as well - it's really only a symbolic price!
Dietmar.
Yes, contributing to the cause. I
might be a heavy user.
I'm not quite sure how things are calculated and checked. IIRC mine said 3-year exp (docs say 2 right?), but it ran out just after the last MR of 1.8, and so 1.8's actual birthdate would be well before that. So I'm not sure I can run a test. Enforcement might not be turned on for a beta, or maybe not at all, or perhaps there's a certain upgrade gap needed.
I'm actually not sure how PI's works either, as even full download and installs of major core program upgrades still work -- might only trigger when they go from 1.x to 2.x?