Stargazing Deep Space Imaging and stacking images for less noise

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

This discussion focuses on the advantages of stacking multiple exposures in deep space imaging to reduce noise and enhance image quality. Key software tools mentioned include Deep Sky Stacker (DSS), Photoshop CC, Nebulosity, and PixInsight, with DSS being favored for its user-friendliness. The conversation highlights the importance of managing sensor thermal noise and improving the signal-to-noise ratio, particularly when using high ISO settings. Participants also share insights on color correction and post-processing techniques to achieve better results in astrophotography.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of astrophotography principles
  • Familiarity with image stacking techniques
  • Basic knowledge of color correction in image editing software
  • Experience with specific software tools like Deep Sky Stacker and Photoshop CC
NEXT STEPS
  • Research advanced techniques for color correction in Photoshop CC
  • Learn about the features and capabilities of PixInsight for astrophotography
  • Explore tutorials on using Deep Sky Stacker effectively
  • Investigate the use of ImageJ for post-processing astrophotography images
USEFUL FOR

Astrophotographers, image processing enthusiasts, and anyone interested in enhancing their deep space imaging techniques through stacking and post-processing methods.

  • #31
davenn said:
OK I see my misunderstanding LOL till I did comparisons of star fields, I didn't realize it was so faint on your image ... so big arrow to hilite it for others reading the thread ...

Yeah, it's still down in the dirt. I can pull it out more, but then the non-perfect background subtraction becomes more noticeable as well. I'm also becoming more painfully aware of the display differences between a Mac and WinBlows.
 
Astronomy news on Phys.org
  • #32
Andy Resnick said:
I'm also becoming more painfully aware of the display differences between a Mac and WinBlows.

in what way ?
 
  • #33
davenn said:
in what way ?

I think it's 'gamma'- contrast at the low end is higher on my Mac than my windows box.
 
  • #34
That's not really Microsofts fault now is it?
 
  • Like
Likes davenn
  • #35
glappkaeft said:
That's not really Microsofts fault now is it?

maybe not
one would have to do a comparison with the same brand monitors and both calibrated

Andy, unless your monitors were calibrated, you can't really do a comparison, there's just too much variation

here's a professional calibration tool ...
http://www.digitalcamerawarehouse.com.au/prod8682.htm
Dave
 
  • #36
Yeah, I make sure my my main photo editing screen (a DELL Ultrasharp U2711H) is well calibrated. It is sometimes a bit annoying since a well calibrated screen is rather bright if you turn the lights down in the room.
 
  • Like
Likes davenn
  • #37
I believe Canon offers a good AP option with their more recent DSL series. I use APT as my interface, which also appears a good option. I, of course, welcome dissenting opinions.
 
  • #38
Chronos said:
I use APT as my interface

not sure what you are referring to ?

... yeah, that didn't really work out on the 5D s(sr) ... the filtering was still too strong

Nikon did a much better job with the D810A which was designed exclusively for AP
with a filtering system in it that specifically enhances the appropriate band pass areas eg Ha
(Hydrogen Alpha)
Because of the huge cost of the D810A and the fact I would have to buy new lenses, I went the other way and bought a Canon 700D and did my own filter mod. This removed the IR filter and the colour bandwidth limiting filter giving a big increase in sensitivity to the red end of the spectrumDave
 
Last edited:
  • #40

Similar threads

  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 43 ·
2
Replies
43
Views
12K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
5K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
13K