NGC 2403 LRGBHa

[JustAstrophotography]

Oh one extra thing I wanted to add - I'm still getting my feet wet with this astrobin trial, but in the details/software section I noticed that ST is split into two slightly different options. One starts out with "Startools..." and the other "Silicon Fields Startools..."

Beyond being uncertain which to pick (I did the latter as it is more in line with most of the options there), that is also splitting up ST's total of users and images, when they really should be combined.

Maybe something that somebody with some pull can fix up with a note to their admins, or admin since it seems mostly a one-man shop.

Ive only ever used the first one " Startools signal evolution tracking engine". Honestly I haven't seen the other one until you mentioned it.
Around a year ago I did start a Startools group on astrobin because I could not for the life of me find one.

[Mike in Rancho]

Ive only ever used the first one " Startools signal evolution tracking engine". Honestly I haven't seen the other one until you mentioned it.
Around a year ago I did start a Startools group on astrobin because I could not for the life of me find one.

Cool! I ended up subscribing, but again I don't know my way around it at all. Just mashing buttons and seeing what happens.

I found that group - do you just hit join? And then it populates with all images from members, or...? I didn't see any group forum type subjects listed (assuming that's how it works, I have no idea).

[Mike in Rancho]

This ended up being my "final" version, after a great deal of going back and re-tweaking over and over. I know we aren't supposed to do that!

But I just never got it to where I was kind of happy with things. I'm sure it's my fault for trying to do a little-ish galaxy with only 4 hours of real target integration.

https://astrob.in/wv97zk/D/

At the last minute, figuring at least the higher-SNR galaxy detail here was decent, I tried to process the full FOV the same way, but it just didn't pan out.

I will have to keep working on it, maybe make a new thread with specific questions. The full image, like this one, was processed at 100% scale, no binning. So since the pixels and pixel scales are identical, just one version is cropped in, I figure it must be a scaling issue with the modules. As in, mabye only some work on an actual pixel basis, while others are more based on percentage scale of the whole image. For example in HDR we are setting a pixel scale, but it tells us what the image percentage of that is. But, which is the more important parameter that the module actually cares about?

And the same goes for the other modules, how would one have to adjust for crop vs non-crop...

Some may be impossible to replicate on different FOV's. Wipe I imagine, since it is scanning the field for certain clues.

[JustAstrophotography]

Yes! under explore you can click on groups and search for it and you should be able to just join.

I do feel like we should have them merge the two software types for startools in the detail section. I think in the meantime I'll put down both. Now I have so many more Startools astro photos to look through!

[Mike in Rancho]

I found it and clicked Join.

But it said it's not a survey of Startools images or an auto-include by members, so it looks like we have to link/add specific images if we want to have photos show in the group?

I need to spend some more time poking around astrobin to figure it all out. Just scraping by at the moment.

For my 2403, I finally came up with what seems a fair enough edit, using 541 to hope for better SVD samples. I still don't really like the ringing, but used a bit of no-iteration shrink following color in order to dering them a little more, on top of the 70 or 80% that I had the SVD module set at. So overall the stars aren't as pinpointed as prior versions, though that may also have to do with the OptiDev stretch probably being different. I did fiddle a bit with the ROI and the IFD in order to brighten up the galaxy -- this allows for better HDR module "reveal core" like detail, but blows up the star diffraction a bit too. Trade offs.

Full scale processing (good thing for the new GPU!) also reveals I have some work to do on stars away from center. Maybe backspacing of the coma corrector, tilt, or even something shifting due to gravity. I better figure that out. But, still worth putting up because there are so many tiny background galaxies!

Here's a scaled down and compressed version for the ST gallery. I also went a wee bit stronger on the Ha accenting.

NGC2403 5h full FOV 100pct LRGBHa ST9-541 3E 1600.jpg (478.83 KiB) Viewed 2292 times

I also added it as a new revision to astrobin, but I can't seem to make a link just to the revision. Maybe because the whole thing was already marked as a "final"? But the old link should go to the main page which will have the revisions. The new one is E. https://astrob.in/wv97zk/D/

I think I got the overall detail as close as I could to the crop version. Comments?

If it holds up, I'll see about switching this one into the astrobin final spot. The scale will be the same.

[JustAstrophotography]

Awesome, and welcome!

I do need to use astrobin more myself. Under the action tap when you're viewing an imaging from your profile page you should be able to select "send to group" and from there it will ask which of the groups you're in you'd like to send it to. There might be a way to auto that process when you make an image public by I haven't gotten that far. I really need to load more of my images on there.

2403 looks really great!