Richard Crisp wrote:
"Rick Johnson" wrote in message
ster.com...
Richard Crisp wrote:
i shot some unfiltered lumnance last night of M31: 3.75 hours. I added
that to the color image (6 hours) taken last week to make an LRGB

this was a quick and dirty processing of the data using some old version
of photshop on my laptop.

I am curious to see how this will look when I can get back to my regular
computer for processing it.

Using the PL39000C one shot color in conjunction with the PL16803 for
luminance seems like a good way to go. The scope was an AP%%EDF f/7 with
the 4" field flattener

The Luminance was shot last night with about 83% of the lunar disk
illuminated. The skies were reasaonably transparent it seems.



That laptop monitor must be dying. The image is way too bright on mine
losing a lot of detail and color.


hmm, i just returned home and took a look at it on my monitor i will use to
process it afresh and it doesn't look too bright here

maybe your monitor is turned up a bit too hot? that may explain why your
backgrounds look pretty dark to me typically

anyway it is all academic because I plan to reprocess it today.

All your other images appear correct to me, just this one seems blown out.

I usually set my background to about a count of 15 or so out of 256. I
do like it rather dark rather than gray. This new monitor does show the
darker levels better but using a 24 step gray scale each level is
virtually an identical increase in brightness.

Rick


--
Correct domain name is arvig and it is net not com. Prefix is correct.
Third character is a zero rather than a capital "Oh".