Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.
 

Re: Another question about color calibration

Expand Messages
  • Stan
    ... When creating the color images, were all of the color ratios set to 1.0 for both images? Those unweighted images look pretty good, though not exactly
    Message 1 of 13 , Jul 13, 2013
      --- Mark Striebeck <mark.striebeck@...> wrote:
      > I then stacked them with CCDStack and color combined them.

      When creating the color images, were all of the color ratios set to 1.0 for both images?

      Those "unweighted" images look pretty good, though not exactly alike in terms of the relative ratios of star colors. The nebulas do look realistic and compare well with other color pics - the Bubble is near-monotone red whereas the Crescent has a bluish haze. IMHO those images' color balances are very nearly "correct" and should be tweaked only slightly (if at all).

      > ...weights from XCalibrator applied (without any stretching)

      I have no experience with XCalibrator. It seems to me that if the conditions and sky alt were similar for both images then the same (or very similar) ratios should be applied to both images. To my eye, both of the XCalibrator weighted images look wrong for nebula and star colors (there are some green stars in the Crescent which is a no-no).

      So maybe you are not operating XCalibrator correctly?

      Stan
    • Mike Dodd
      ... I tried Dragon early-on in my recovery from a 2007 stroke, but it made too many mistakes, so I spent a lot of time proofing and correcting. I finally
      Message 2 of 13 , Jul 14, 2013
        Bob Franke wrote:
        > Sorry for the long post. I tend to get wordy with Dragon dictation.
        > <g>

        I tried Dragon early-on in my recovery from a 2007 stroke, but it made
        too many mistakes, so I spent a lot of time proofing and correcting. I
        finally decided to go back to keyboarding, first with one hand, and
        eventually with both. (My left hand is now about 90% for typing -- still
        not easy, but at least functional.)

        I'm pleased to hear from another Dragon user. It's possible that the
        errors I experienced were due to my slightly-impaired speech at the
        time. I should try it again now to see if it works better.
        --
        Mike

        Mike Dodd
        http://astronomy.mdodd.com
        Louisa County, Virginia USA N37.58.23 W77.56.24
      • Bob Franke
        Hello Mark, I loaded your color and the WCS files into CCDStack. The three color files were registered with each other but not to the WCS. So the first process
        Message 3 of 13 , Jul 14, 2013
          Hello Mark,

          I loaded your color and the WCS files into CCDStack. The three color files were registered with each other but not to the WCS. So the first process was to register the color files to the WCS file. Then I saved the four files as 32-bit floating-point.

          I then loaded the four files into eXcalibrator, set then Min/Max magnitudes to 15/19 and clicked the NOMAD radio button. I selected "eXcalibrator classic" and clicked the Calibrate button. Two clicks of the Remove Outliers button reduced the star count to 9 and the standard deviation to 0.155. This gave a similar answer to the SExtractor routine with just one click of Remove Outliers. I decided to go with the "eXcalibrator classic" RGB ratios of 1.000, 1.155 and 1.467.

          Then I simply used CCDStack to create the RGB image with the above ratios. For setting the background, I selected an area in the lower right-hand corner and checked the Desaturate Background box. Final image stretching was done with PhotoShop.

          If this were my data, I probably would not use the NOMAD stars. I would simply use my standard RGB image train calibration of 1.00, 0.95 and 1.05. This calibration was determined with eXcalibrator and stars from the Sloan Digital Sky Survey. I only consider a NOMAD calibration when I have many calibration stars.

          Hope this helps,
          Bob


          --- In ccd-newastro@yahoogroups.com, Mark Striebeck <mark.striebeck@...> wrote:
          >
          > Hi Bob,
          >
          > Thanks for taking a closer look. How did you process the bubble nebula
          > images to get the much more realistic color ratios?
          >
          > MarkS
          > On Jul 14, 2013 1:05 AM, "Bob Franke" <bfranke@...> wrote:
          >
          > > **
          > >
          > >
          > > Okay folks, here are my eXcalibrator test results with Mark's images.
          > >
          > > Bubble RGB ratios are...
          > > 1.000 1.155 and 1.467
          > >
          > > Crescent RGB ratios are...
          > > 1.000, 1.305 and 1.533.
          > >
          > > Using the sometimes-inaccurate NOMAD data may account for the difference.
          > >
          > > The below webpage has a complete description of the processing steps and
          > > mouse-over images showing the difference between uncorrected and
          > > eXcalibrator corrected results.
          > > http://bf-astro.com/colorTest/markTest.htm
          > >
          > > Regards,
          > > Bob
          > > Shameless freeware plug,
          > > http://bf-astro.com/eXcalibrator/excalibrator.htm
          > >
          > > --- In ccd-newastro@yahoogroups.com, Mark Striebeck <mark.striebeck@>
          > > wrote:
          > > >
          > > > On Sat, Jul 13, 2013 at 9:27 AM, Stan <stan_ccd@> wrote:
          > > >
          > > > > **
          > > > >
          > > > >
          > > > > --- Mark Striebeck <mark.striebeck@> wrote:
          > > > > > I then stacked them with CCDStack and color combined them.
          > > > >
          > > > > When creating the color images, were all of the color ratios set to 1.0
          > > > > for both images?
          > > > >
          > > >
          > > > Yes, the non-weighted images had all color ratios set to 1.0.
          > > >
          > > > >
          > > > > Those "weighted" images look pretty good, though not exactly alike in
          > > > > terms of the relative ratios of star colors. The nebulas do look
          > > realistic
          > > > > and compare well with other color pix - the Bubble is near-monotone red
          > > > > whereas the Crescent has a bluish haze. IMHO those images' color
          > > balances
          > > > > are very neasrly "correct" and should be tweaked only slightly (if at
          > > all).
          > > > >
          > > >
          > > > If found some images of the Bubble nebula where the bubble nebula has a
          > > > blueish hue - which is what the weighted image looks like.
          > > >
          > > > >
          > > > > > ...weights from XCalibrator applied (without any stretching)
          > > > >
          > > > > I have no experience with XCalibrator. It seems to me that if the
          > > > > conditions and sky alt were similar for both images then the same (or
          > > very
          > > > > similar) ratios should be applied to both images. To my eye, the
          > > > > XCalibrator (weighted) images look wrong for nebula and star colors
          > > (there
          > > > > are some green stars in the Crescent which is a no-no).
          > > > >
          > > > > So maybe you are not operating XCalibrator correctly?
          > > > >
          > > >
          > > > That is absolutely possible. And yes, I expected too that the color
          > > ratios
          > > > for both images would have been somewhat similar.
          > > >
          > > > How do others here adjust the colors in their images? I'd love to try out
          > > > different techniques!
          > > >
          > > > MarkS
          > > >
          > > > >
          > > > > Stan
          > > > >
          > > > >
          > > > >
          > > >
          > > >
          > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
          > > >
          > >
          > >
          > >
          >
          >
          > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
          >
        • Mark Striebeck
          ... Ah - I forgot that (to register the wcs file to the color files)! Thanks!!! ... [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
          Message 4 of 13 , Jul 15, 2013
            On Sun, Jul 14, 2013 at 8:55 PM, Bob Franke <bfranke@...> wrote:

            > **
            >
            >
            > Hello Mark,
            >
            > I loaded your color and the WCS files into CCDStack. The three color files
            > were registered with each other but not to the WCS. So the first process
            > was to register the color files to the WCS file. Then I saved the four
            > files as 32-bit floating-point.
            >
            Ah - I forgot that (to register the wcs file to the color files)! Thanks!!!

            >
            > I then loaded the four files into eXcalibrator, set then Min/Max
            > magnitudes to 15/19 and clicked the NOMAD radio button. I selected
            > "eXcalibrator classic" and clicked the Calibrate button. Two clicks of the
            > Remove Outliers button reduced the star count to 9 and the standard
            > deviation to 0.155. This gave a similar answer to the SExtractor routine
            > with just one click of Remove Outliers. I decided to go with the
            > "eXcalibrator classic" RGB ratios of 1.000, 1.155 and 1.467.
            >
            > Then I simply used CCDStack to create the RGB image with the above ratios.
            > For setting the background, I selected an area in the lower right-hand
            > corner and checked the Desaturate Background box. Final image stretching
            > was done with PhotoShop.
            >
            > If this were my data, I probably would not use the NOMAD stars. I would
            > simply use my standard RGB image train calibration of 1.00, 0.95 and 1.05.
            > This calibration was determined with eXcalibrator and stars from the Sloan
            > Digital Sky Survey. I only consider a NOMAD calibration when I have many
            > calibration stars.
            >
            > Hope this helps,
            > Bob
            >
            >
            > --- In ccd-newastro@yahoogroups.com, Mark Striebeck <mark.striebeck@...>
            > wrote:
            > >
            > > Hi Bob,
            > >
            > > Thanks for taking a closer look. How did you process the bubble nebula
            > > images to get the much more realistic color ratios?
            > >
            > > MarkS
            > > On Jul 14, 2013 1:05 AM, "Bob Franke" <bfranke@...> wrote:
            > >
            > > > **
            >
            > > >
            > > >
            > > > Okay folks, here are my eXcalibrator test results with Mark's images.
            > > >
            > > > Bubble RGB ratios are...
            > > > 1.000 1.155 and 1.467
            > > >
            > > > Crescent RGB ratios are...
            > > > 1.000, 1.305 and 1.533.
            > > >
            > > > Using the sometimes-inaccurate NOMAD data may account for the
            > difference.
            > > >
            > > > The below webpage has a complete description of the processing steps
            > and
            > > > mouse-over images showing the difference between uncorrected and
            > > > eXcalibrator corrected results.
            > > > http://bf-astro.com/colorTest/markTest.htm
            > > >
            > > > Regards,
            > > > Bob
            > > > Shameless freeware plug,
            > > > http://bf-astro.com/eXcalibrator/excalibrator.htm
            > > >
            > > > --- In ccd-newastro@yahoogroups.com, Mark Striebeck <mark.striebeck@>
            > > > wrote:
            >
            > > > >
            > > > > On Sat, Jul 13, 2013 at 9:27 AM, Stan <stan_ccd@> wrote:
            > > > >
            > > > > > **
            > > > > >
            > > > > >
            > > > > > --- Mark Striebeck <mark.striebeck@> wrote:
            > > > > > > I then stacked them with CCDStack and color combined them.
            > > > > >
            > > > > > When creating the color images, were all of the color ratios set
            > to 1.0
            > > > > > for both images?
            > > > > >
            > > > >
            > > > > Yes, the non-weighted images had all color ratios set to 1.0.
            > > > >
            > > > > >
            > > > > > Those "weighted" images look pretty good, though not exactly alike
            > in
            > > > > > terms of the relative ratios of star colors. The nebulas do look
            > > > realistic
            > > > > > and compare well with other color pix - the Bubble is
            > near-monotone red
            > > > > > whereas the Crescent has a bluish haze. IMHO those images' color
            > > > balances
            > > > > > are very neasrly "correct" and should be tweaked only slightly (if
            > at
            > > > all).
            > > > > >
            > > > >
            > > > > If found some images of the Bubble nebula where the bubble nebula
            > has a
            > > > > blueish hue - which is what the weighted image looks like.
            > > > >
            > > > > >
            > > > > > > ...weights from XCalibrator applied (without any stretching)
            > > > > >
            > > > > > I have no experience with XCalibrator. It seems to me that if the
            > > > > > conditions and sky alt were similar for both images then the same
            > (or
            > > > very
            > > > > > similar) ratios should be applied to both images. To my eye, the
            > > > > > XCalibrator (weighted) images look wrong for nebula and star colors
            > > > (there
            > > > > > are some green stars in the Crescent which is a no-no).
            > > > > >
            > > > > > So maybe you are not operating XCalibrator correctly?
            > > > > >
            > > > >
            > > > > That is absolutely possible. And yes, I expected too that the color
            > > > ratios
            > > > > for both images would have been somewhat similar.
            > > > >
            > > > > How do others here adjust the colors in their images? I'd love to
            > try out
            > > > > different techniques!
            > > > >
            > > > > MarkS
            > > > >
            > > > > >
            > > > > > Stan
            > > > > >
            > > > > >
            > > > > >
            > > > >
            > > > >
            > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
            > > > >
            > > >
            > > >
            > > >
            > >
            > >
            > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
            > >
            >
            >
            >


            [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
          Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.