been busy lately but wanted to get out since we are lucky enough to have 3 groups of spots right now. i would love an opinion on which set of white lights looks best in your opinion (pedro knows why but he won't tell)
also some cak
and i got 1 quick ha. the trees make it difficult this time of year i only have about 2 hours of time that work for doing stuff, so by the time i got to Ha, the tree and power line was getting me. i'm grateful for the park by my house because it keeps the light away (no streetlights behind me or on my block) but you do pay a price for everything.
WL1
WL2
CAK
Ha
triple band 2016-12-01
- marktownley
- Librarian
- Posts: 42272
- Joined: Tue Oct 18, 2011 5:27 pm
- Location: Brierley Hills, UK
- Has thanked: 20435 times
- Been thanked: 10245 times
- Contact:
Re: triple band 2016-12-01
Nice collection of images!
http://brierleyhillsolar.blogspot.co.uk/
Solar images, a collection of all the most up to date live solar data on the web, imaging & processing tutorials - please take a look!
- Montana
- Librarian
- Posts: 34560
- Joined: Mon Oct 17, 2011 5:25 pm
- Location: Cheshire, UK
- Has thanked: 17667 times
- Been thanked: 8789 times
Re: triple band 2016-12-01
I got a bit confused what was what, I prefer the granulation in image 1 and the spots detail in image 2 Out of the spot pair images I like the granulation in WL1 and the spot detail in WL 2
Super CaK
Alexandra
Super CaK
Alexandra
Last edited by Montana on Fri Dec 02, 2016 12:16 pm, edited 1 time in total.
- grimble_cornet
- Way More Fun to Share It!!
- Posts: 3537
- Joined: Tue Jul 10, 2012 5:10 pm
- Location: UK West Midlands
- Been thanked: 47 times
Re: triple band 2016-12-01
Great set of images in 3 bands.
As far as the white lights are concerned........
Difficult to compare images with slightly different brightness/contrast etc so I copied the interesting bits from images 1+5 and 2+6 and pasted them side by side in PS: I still find it difficult to chose a clear winner but the second set seems to show a little more detail in the spots. This is not clear in image 6 as the higher contrast of image 2 makes it look better?
I would like to see the raw images......... is the difference in capture (scope/camera/filter/exposure etc.) or in processing?
As far as the white lights are concerned........
Difficult to compare images with slightly different brightness/contrast etc so I copied the interesting bits from images 1+5 and 2+6 and pasted them side by side in PS: I still find it difficult to chose a clear winner but the second set seems to show a little more detail in the spots. This is not clear in image 6 as the higher contrast of image 2 makes it look better?
I would like to see the raw images......... is the difference in capture (scope/camera/filter/exposure etc.) or in processing?
.
.
.
Mike Garbett
Selection of Solar and Deep Sky images on Flickr: https://www.flickr.com/photos/mikegarbett/
.
.
Mike Garbett
Selection of Solar and Deep Sky images on Flickr: https://www.flickr.com/photos/mikegarbett/
Re: triple band 2016-12-01
well they are different exposure times, but same histogram levels
i tried to run the exact same processing on them in imppg and gimp, but i might not have done a good job, i'm not great with ps/gimp yet
alexandra: thanks for cak props, it was able toget a 2.5x powermate on it and not have it look like crap, i was pleasantly surprised
well i'll just let it out of the bag, the point is a lunt vs baader comparison, but i didn't want to give any hints at all how they could be different
i tried to run the exact same processing on them in imppg and gimp, but i might not have done a good job, i'm not great with ps/gimp yet
alexandra: thanks for cak props, it was able toget a 2.5x powermate on it and not have it look like crap, i was pleasantly surprised
well i'll just let it out of the bag, the point is a lunt vs baader comparison, but i didn't want to give any hints at all how they could be different