StarTools

Hi there guys,

I put up a post below recently regarding trying to understand the effect autodev was having on my image. After a fair bit of playing around I have managed to get to a final image which I am quite happy with, bear in mind it is my first astrophotography image.

That said, I have seen what you guys are able to pull out of some images users have uploaded. I think to have an admin put into context what the software is capable of by using an image I have put hours into myself would be really helpful if you wouldn't mind. If someone would provide me with a workflow as well that would be amazing.

The link to the TIFF is here - http://dropcanvas.com/#51i608w87X8558 Just click download at the top right of the page.

The best I got out of it was here - http://www.flickr.com/photos/ubertank/8 ... otostream/ and to be honest I am really pleased. A huge amount of it was guesswork in ST though, so a workflow by an admin would be great. As I am still undecided on the software I screenshotted the final result in ST, pasted to paint and converted to a JPEG before doing a bit more in Photoshop. So yeah, a lot of quality lost there. I'd much rather pay the money and be able to save in ST and will once I understand it a little more.

If you are willing to oblige, thanks in advance admins.

Well...I'm not an admin, but I gave it a shot.
I went for a "softer" approach, with a bit less of an attack on the gradient, relying on Life->Isolate to help separate M51 from the background later. I also balanced color more to what I think of when I think M51, but that's strictly personal choice.

Don't know that either one is any "better"...and I'm sure Ivo will put us all to shame as always. But it was a fun set of data to work with, and I enjoyed the chance to see what I could get out of it.

File loaded [\ubertank - startools\m5123lightsnodarks.TIF].
---
--- Bin
Parameter [Scale] set to [(scale/noise reduction 50.00%)/(400.00%)/(+2.00 bits)]
--- Crop
Parameter [X1] set to [6 pixels]
Parameter [Y1] set to [13 pixels]
Parameter [X2] set to [2152 pixels (-7)]
Parameter [Y2] set to [1447 pixels (-2)]
--- Auto Develop
Parameter [Gamma] set to [1.00]
Parameter [Outside ROI Influence] set to [5 %]
Parameter [Ignore Detail <] set to [Off]
--- Wipe
Parameter [Mode] set to [Correct Color & Brightness]
Parameter [Top End Treatment] set to [Wipe 2.0]
Parameter [Cap Green] set to [No]
Parameter [Output Gradient Only] set to [No]
Parameter [Precision] set to [256 x 256 pixels]
Parameter [Dark Anomaly Filter] set to [30 pixels]
Parameter [Drop Off Point] set to [0 %]
Parameter [Corner Aggressiveness] set to [100 %]
Parameter [Aggressiveness] set to [90 %]
Parameter [Dark Anomaly Headroom] set to [0 %]
--- Develop
Parameter [White Calibration] set to [Use Stars]
Parameter [Gamma] set to [1.18]
Parameter [Skyglow] set to [0 %]
Parameter [Digital Development] set to [93.68 %]
Parameter [Blue Luminance Contrib.] set to [100 %]
Parameter [Green Luminance Contrib.] set to [100 %]
Parameter [Red Luminance Contrib.] set to [100 %]
Parameter [Dark Anomaly Headroom] set to [5 %]
Parameter [Dark Anomaly Filter] set to [Off]
--- Wavelet Sharpen
Parameter [Channels] set to [Brightness Only]
Parameter [Scale 1] set to [0 %]
Parameter [Scale 2] set to [0 %]
Parameter [Scale 3] set to [49 %]
Parameter [Scale 4] set to [90 %]
Parameter [Scale 5] set to [100 %]
Parameter [Mask Fuzz] set to [8.0 pixels]
Parameter [Brightness Mask Power] set to [0.00]
Parameter [Amount] set to [100 %]
Parameter [Small Detail Bias] set to [75 %]
--- Life
Parameter [Detail Preservation] set to [Linear Brightness Mask]
Parameter [Compositing Algorithm] set to [Multiply, Gamma Correct]
Parameter [Inherit Brightness, Color] set to [Off]
Parameter [Output Glow Only] set to [No]
Parameter [Airy Disk Sampling] set to [128 x 128 pixels]
Parameter [Airy Disk Radius] set to [8 pixels]
Parameter [Glow Threshold] set to [0 %]
Parameter [Detail Preservation Radius] set to [20.0 pixels]
Parameter [Saturation] set to [100 %]
Parameter [Strength] set to [72 %]
Parameter [Mask Fuzz] set to [1.0 pixels]
--- Color
Parameter [Cap Green] set to [To Brown]
Parameter [Bottom End Saturation] set to [2.00]
Parameter [Top End Saturation] set to [2.80]
Parameter [Saturation] set to [312 %]
Parameter [Blue Ratio] set to [1.51]
Parameter [Green Ratio] set to [1.43]
Parameter [Red Ratio] set to [2.21]
Parameter [Mask Fuzz] set to [1.0 pixels]
--- Contrast
Parameter [Expose Dark Areas] set to [No]
Parameter [Compensate Gamma] set to [No]
Parameter [Precision] set to [256 x 256 pixels]
Parameter [Dark Anomaly Filter] set to [1 pixels]
Parameter [Aggressiveness] set to [75 %]
Parameter [Dark Anomaly Headroom] set to [5 %]
--- Wavelet De-Noise
Parameter [Scale 1] set to [30 %]
Parameter [Scale 2] set to [20 %]
Parameter [Scale 3] set to [12 %]
Parameter [Scale 4] set to [0 %]
Parameter [Scale 5] set to [0 %]
Parameter [Mask Fuzz] set to [1.0 pixels]
Parameter [Brightness Mask Power] set to [0.00]
Parameter [Color Detail Loss] set to [50 %]
Parameter [Brightness Detail Loss] set to [50 %]
Parameter [Structural Emphasis] set to [0 pixels]
Parameter [Edge Repair Strength] set to [15 %]
Parameter [Noise Tracking Influence] set to [100 %]
Parameter [Intelligent Despeckle] set to [0 %]
File saved [\ubertank - startools\m5123lightsnodarks_ST.tiff].

Honestly, I think Gordon nailed it here!
That said, it seem like you managed quite well yourself already. Try following Gordon's flow with regards to Wipe (early on) and Color (later, just before swithcing off tracking) - it should yield a slightly better color balance (I really like Gordon's color balance!).
I'm having trouble downloading the TIFF myself - the download times out after a few minutes. It could be a local problem though as I've just moved house and re-connected everything...
Will retry in the next couple of days.

I'm so impressed.

Thanks so much for taking the time to do that. I can't tell you how helpful it is to have it laid out like that so you can perform each step, see the change it makes and read the tooltip. I'll go through that process a few times to get accustomed to it.

The software is really impressive.

I have gone through the process myself but did not manage to get the background and stars as noise free as you did. I'm sure this is because you used Life>Isolate. Can I ask at which stage exactly you performed it and what the process is to perform an effective isolation?

I agree with your colour selection. It's how I see the galaxy aswell.

Well done.

ubertank wrote:I'm so impressed.

Aww shucks.

The software is really impressive.

It really is.

The "magic"...at least to me...is its ability to "change the past". Being able to perform step 3, and then 4, 5, and 6, and ONLY THEN say "Hrm...what if I'd done step 3 like so?" but leave 4-6 intact. It's a game changer for me, anyway.

Can I ask at which stage exactly you performed it and what the process is to perform an effective isolation?

You can see in the workflow above WHEN I performed the isolate.

As for the process, Ivo has detailed it in one of his video tutorials here. Granted, that was made on an older version, so I now use primarily the lassoo selection method to select the object, rather than the click-and-grow he demonstrates there, but the process is the same from there.

In my opinion, there are 2 "tricks" to that technique:

1) Don't try to remove ALL the noise. Make use of the "strength" slider, and pull it down below 100%. Too much "isolation" will have exactly that effect...it will isolate the object completely, leaving a sterile and lifeless background, imo. So let some of the background noise...and hence, fainter stars and general "activity" in the background...remain. You still have some powerful noise-reduction tools at your disposal later on, to do final cleanup of noise.

2) Select slightly LESS than the object you want to isolate...use the shrink button in the mask perhaps. The isolate process tends to be pretty "sharp"...it's a dramatic difference. By selecting slightly less than the object you're after, you can use Mask Fuzz, and still capture the entire object, but the edges will be less "defined", so the end result will look more natural, rather than appearing as though you just pasted the object into a star field.

---

I must agree with Ivo...you certainly managed quite well yourself early on. No WAY i could have produced those results from that data when i first started using the software. I think once you start getting a more natural feel for what some of the modules do, you're going to do some truly impressive work!