@@larryfine4719 I saw someone else on Instagram do it with the lagoon it was pretty much mostly just yellow and orange with a little bit of blue in the center. I thought it looked pretty good. I like traditional SHO and RGB for Lagoon as well, both look good. Saturation at .800 made it even brighter on the first go which is why I went to .700 a mask would be pretty necessary for the lagoon nebula, also try a range mask it’s pretty easy because you can target just the highlights and it’s only one step. You can make it soft without having to do extra steps, the California is not nearly as bright if anything choosing a darker orange might be the trick but I had a lot of red from the HOO since the Ha was strong and didn’t want to have it just be all orange.

Thank your sir!

Yeah, that’s what I was kind of saying at the end we’ll see a big push of the style images for a few months, I think people that are newer to NB and don’t like traditional pallets because they can be challenging at first, but eventually learn to embrace them and the more expansive colors you can create with RGB vs ditching green but still a fun tool for those who want another way to process certain targets. I’ll likely forever prefer SHO and LRGB the most. We saw this with Forax a few years ago and when the NB normalizing script came of everyone with a dual nb color filter was posting yellow/blue false Hubble images for 6 months.

Thanks as always for the kind words, I felt the need to do an intro so people knew it was a bit of a collaboration and the context for me doing it. But after that, I figured it could be done in 15 minutes, which is what that portion took, and I didn’t really cut anything. I even showed fixing the stretch on the S2 data so that’s really about how long the whole process actually takes

@@darkrangersinc I will be testing my askar O3S2 filter next clear night and combine with the Optlong L-Ultimate and see what happens.

@@nikaxstrophotography since you use APP, you can just do extract HA (mono) to get the Sii from that filter. I just do Extract Ha and Oiii - mono, with the first filter and then he said he was going to add an S2. I don’t know if he has because I haven’t used color with that program in a while, but if he hasn’t extract HA, he said would do the same thing because it’s just targeting the red channel. I think it’s a much cleaner and more monochrome looking data set, than using PI and separating the channels

@@darkrangersinc Thanks I'll try it out next clear (if ever) night

@@mjsweeps cool glad you liked it! It’s kind of hard to judge with a brand new pallet of whether you’re doing it “right” or not. Whatever than means 😉

@@starpartyguy5605 yeah it’s a great quality mount and they are retroactively upgradable which I love. I also think that G 11 tripod is probably one of the best I’ve ever seen. It’s insanely sturdy and compact still

@@jesusbilbao yeah you have to download everything to the computer. That’s actually going on the rig. If you go to my website, I have all the links that you need on the Nina page.

I used a 2600, but the near IR band wasn’t really the difference maker for me. It was the better placement of the 3 bands in the visible range. So even with a built in IR cut it will still give a more natural look that the triband

It actually failed in warmer temps ironically and yes it needs a stronger moth I’ve since swapped out the AM5 for 3 stronger mounts all with 50-66lbs of capacity and it does much better. The point was the AM5 couldn’t really handle the 41lb optic even though they claim 44. After that episode came out they did put in a firmware update to give slower slewing as kind of a bandaid. But in my opinion, if you claim 44 pounds the amount should be able to operate at full speed with a scope under that weight 🤷🏻‍♂️

@@darkrangersinc Like so many companies, over promise and under deliver. The heaviest scope I'll ever put on the AM5 is the 107APO; heck I can barely lift it up at my age. I can't imagine a 41 pounder :)

Glad it helped! (Ryan btw 😉)

@@Chiclets1 if I show it and explain it at the same time, it has another 10+ minutes if people want to see it I’ve probably explained GHS and five different episodes by now. People don’t even watch something 20 minutes much less 30 🤷🏻‍♂️

@@old_photons I compared the data in my HOO part 2 processing tutorial to the SVX140T showing the difference between an APO and Reflector and shared some thoughts on the differences. If you follow me on Instagram Instagram, there’s also more images posted from the scope as well. To be honest once I got the StellarVue even though it’s just shy of 1000mm instead of 1300mm I didn’t really use the SCA a ton more but I did several more images that I did post if you want to check it out. I’ve always been a bigger fan of refractors over reflectors, but overall it’s a solid scope, I’ll likely use it for Galaxy season each year and that’s about it. Since doing the review I had 4 more scopes come and Galaxy season passed so given I provided more images to compare and my thoughts in comparing the data it felt sufficient for now. Perhaps I can include a follow up conversation in my next Q&A. Having a better mount makes a big difference and once you get it dialed in it’s a solid performer though if you’re looking at one. But I would get an SVX 152 if you need 12-1300mm personally.

@@woody5109 thanks! For this image I just used Pixinsight and Photoshop, Pixinsight was $260 when I bought it and the Lightroom/Photoshop bundle is $9.99 but that also includes cloud space. The nice thing about Lightroom is you can use it on your phone so when I’m done on my computer and I transferred it to my phone to post a social media, I’ll usually fine-tune the tiff file in Lightroom and then I can also export it from there in whatever format I want so if I want to keep it as a tiff I can if I want to make a lower quality JPEG for social media as well as minor adjustments. I guess I did also use topaz denoise at the end, I think that was $50 as a one time purchase. I don’t think it’s available anymore by itself. I purchased the noise and sharpening tool separately now I think they just sell it as a bundle of their photo AI, which is more expensive. But you can also just use Noisexterminator. However for color noise specifically I think topaz is better.

@@woody5109 I use an M2 Max Mac, works great for me only 64mb of ram and I can easily have Final Cut Pro open with 4k video and edit in both programs all at the same time.

@@jesusbilbao likely the camera difference. The pixel size might be the bigger issue. I did this one on accident, but I’ve done it since and I’ve got it to work with even bigger gaps and focal length like 200mm. Did they say why in the forums or was a camera combination being different the reason?

Last response after other attempts was “WBPP will not group together files with initial different dimensions. What you can do however is use all the registered files and integrate them manually”.

@@jesusbilbao it’s likely the pixel dimensions though which goes back to the sensor size. It will work with the same camera. I’ve done it repeatedly. I think the problem is you have two different sensors. Although this doesn’t seem to be true because I’ve shot the same target with two different cameras that had the same sensor but slightly different dimensions and it still worked. The OGMA 26M and ZWO 2600MM have the 571 sensor but slightly different dimensions and it still stacked together. Having said that they are pretty close together so it’s only about 10 pixels in each dimension.

@@darkrangersinc I finally tried to do this manually (not with WBPP). I did get it to integrate the 2 sets of data but the result obviously shows a pixel problem confirming what you indicate.

@@Neanderthal75 yeah that’s why I wanted to spend some time on expectations because I think some people choose a pallet wear green should be dominant and then spend the whole time trying to get rid of it lol The heart nebula in general is very difficult because there are very concentrated regions of all three gases, but core is mostly green around the fine details where some S2 is mixed in. You see more influence around the outside of the heart that’s where you get all those other colors.

@@nikaxstrophotography Thank you, I am still trying to get folks to work within the constraints of what their data can actually handle and show that it’s easy to push it well beyond. I thought the idea of showing one with the reasonable amount of time (18 hours) vs close to 30 and show the value of adding more time would be helpful.

@@afd33 I guess it all depends on how you look at it. It was about a $350 program and that didn’t cover updates so every couple years you felt like you needed to purchase it again so just paying 120 bucks a year and getting Lightroom as well as all the updates isn’t too bad for my opinion. You also get access to it on different devices like my iPad and iPhone, and some cloud storage. It’s annoying to keep getting all these micro purchases but in this case vs thier old model I don’t mind it. Compared to Pixinsight, where you get free updates for life it’s obviously not nearly as good of a deal but people still complain about the $260. I wanted to stick with options that you could do in both programs for this one. That’s why I didn’t get into camera raw and the sliders too much. I’ve shown that, but I wanted to stick to things that you could do in both. I’ve been using gradient correction as well I’ll have to try SETIs. If I run flats, I usually don’t need to do either though because it will degrade some of the quality of your image sometimes so just be careful and make sure that you really need it because sometimes I’ve noticed no matter how good the program is it takes away some of the good signal.

@@NOVA8264 perfect timing!

@@jimwaters304 glad it helped. Let me know if there’s anything else you guys need help with.

@@jesuschrist2284 haha green acceptance is key 😉. That’s why I wanted to spend some time covering off on why you should have some green in an SHO image. Don’t pick a pallet that puts the strongest color at green and then most of your time trying to eliminate it!

@@darkrangersinc excellent advice :)

The curves are very easy to manipulate in Photoshop. You can choose them by color and bring them down that way you could also use the hue and saturation adjustment layer. I always use the histogram as a guide and never prioritize it over the look. It’s a good way to know if you’re in the right ballpark but as long as I’m getting the look that I’m after I don’t worry about it too much.

I know you don't really get into plugs but I'll do one more and say that folks should really become a Patreon. For full transparency, I was the community member that Ryan was talking about at the beginning about my greens. The fact that he went out of his way explaining and making this tutorial speaks wonders. It's a great community!

@@TheAstrocast i’m sure they will. They just sent me some more accessories. I need to film part two but wanted to do it from a dark skies site. I brought it all to Mexico where I was the last couple weeks, but couldn’t convince anybody to skip a nice meal and night nightlife to go sit in the middle of nowhere with me 😂. I will say overall, it’s pretty limited in terms of what it can do. You definitely need a sturdy tripod and ideally very little wind but if you don’t have super high expectations and take it for what it is, it’s a nice add-on if you have a camera and lens laying around for a dark sky trip

@@darkrangersinc can't wait to at least give it a shot. I just love the quirkyness of these kinds of setups and it's fun to challenge yourself and see how nice of a shot you can get. I definitely would have skipped that meal, but I'm on the east coast!

@@erikarmas9008 if you can send me an email to the one in the bio, I can try to get some help on this. You should be able to watch it from any device!

@@peterdmatthews7427 they actually reached out to me and asked if I wanted to review another scope and said they respected my honesty which was a good sign but then after a couple months of checking in, it never came to fruition so I don’t know if a second version would have been better, but if you’re not using a full frame camera, it should be fine either way. the reason I was tough on that is because it’s pretty expensive for the size and more and more people are using frame cameras so I wanted to really put it to the test

@@michaelkohl2250 only if you’re concerned with that bandpass, I still like the placement of the RGB band passes more than any other filter of its kind. I wasn’t really concerned with the NIR data. The real difference is the location of the other 3 bandpasses. I see this comment every so often and while there is a specific pass for that data it’s not really what makes this filter game changer in my opinion

@@Astrofotografie yeah hence the “?” There are plenty of other options that could make a better case. Personally I love the performance and value from Stellarvue as well. The title was more inspired by their claims that it’s a purpose built premium astrograph.

@@ricardoabh3242 always shoot in RAW yeah. Pixinsight can stack the files as is no need to convert.

@@darkrangersinc very cool, now I was playing with HLG RAW, this maybe not uprooted… tbd