Dismiss Notice
Join Physics Forums Today!
The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

Stargazing Nebulosity is a hard program for the aged?

  1. Jan 3, 2017 #1

    sophiecentaur

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    I have been using Nebulosity to stack multiple images. Doing just that was not beyond me and lo! the noise level drops impressively. I then needed to get the colours to work. De-mosaicing (disgusting word) is necessary to produce a .fit file from .dng. Using the pre-sets in the dialogue (a 3x3 RGB Matrix) gives me greens when the original image of the Orion Nebula is violet (ish). Some random tinkering produces some random colour variations. I am presuming it's something to do with my (Brand New totally FAB) Pentax K2s's Bayer filtering. There must be a way to customise Nebulosity to handle this but I can't find any information - needless to say, the Neb manual never falls over backwards to help a chap.
    Anyone else been there and solved it?
     
  2. jcsd
  3. Jan 3, 2017 #2

    russ_watters

    User Avatar

    Staff: Mentor

    I can't answer your specific question, but as for the title, it isn't just the aged; most astronomy software I've used is not very refined.
     
  4. Jan 4, 2017 #3

    sophiecentaur

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    Yeah. I have written many many procedures that only I could make use of. You could call it Nerdware, perhaps.
     
  5. Jan 4, 2017 #4

    Andy Resnick

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor
    Education Advisor
    2016 Award

    Haven't used Nebulosity, but I do know that accurate color rendering is a major hassle in astrophotography. The only "Gold Standard" I have come across is to export your .fits image into eXcalibrator: http://bf-astro.com/excalibrator/excalibrator.htm

    Good luck... let us know if you figure out a better way!
     
  6. Jan 4, 2017 #5

    sophiecentaur

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    This is far more extreme than 'accuracy' problems, I think. It's almost as if RGB has been interpreted as CMY; the green I am seeing is much the same as minus magenta (the colour of the original picture)
    But then the sky would be white???
     
  7. Jan 7, 2017 #6

    sophiecentaur

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    Just to bring this colour thing to a close. Nebulosity doesn't know enough from my DNG file format to do the right de-mosaicing. I used Aperture (OS X) to produce a 16bit Tiff file and nebulosity seems to be able to make sense of it, producing just the same colours as the original (ignoring any 'casts', which are second year work, as far as I'm concerned)
    The noise improvement from using just ten exposures is impressive. I will post a picture (Orion Nebula) when I have re-done the exposures with the Sky tracker properly aligned. I had to chase around the garden to get pictures at the time and my carefully setup mount was the first casualty. But you expert after-dark workers will know all about the confusion of working without lights.
     
  8. Jan 10, 2017 #7

    Chronos

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    AP, and photography in general, is a complex process that requires numerous factors to be taken into account. The chief goal is to render an image pleasing to the user. They do a pretty decent job at that, on the whole. Low light photography is particularly challenging because of the need to extract every microEV of useful energy out of each captured photon. Asking that to be a user friendly process is a tall order.
     
  9. Jan 10, 2017 #8

    sophiecentaur

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    You could say the same about almost any complex software. It is very possible (not easy) to make software straightforward to use. Take Photoshop and Excel, for instance. The sky's the limit to their capabilities and subtleties and they are both pretty approachable. The difference between them and Nebulosity is the amount of work that's put into their development which reflects on the money they can make the distributors. More specialist software just can't have the amount of development time and it shows, as soon as one fires it up. It's an alien world in there.
    It seems to me that Nebulosity was probably developed by a small group of enthusiasts for their own esoteric use and gradually expanded for distribution. I fully sympathise with the writers in most respects because they are primarily interested in what the software does for them with AP files. It must be a real pain (i've been there) to produce endless upgrades and bug fixes, just for the general user. I will contact them and tell them about my DNG problem - just to add to their tiresome worries.
    Bottom line is, though, that Nebulosity has made things possible for me that I couldn't have achieved without help. It works on OS X and does a lot of what's needed so I'm better off with it than I would be without it.
     
Know someone interested in this topic? Share this thread via Reddit, Google+, Twitter, or Facebook

Have something to add?
Draft saved Draft deleted



Similar Discussions: Nebulosity is a hard program for the aged?
  1. Age of Universe (Replies: 4)

  2. Age of the universe (Replies: 2)

  3. Distance and age (Replies: 3)

Loading...