行星摄影大师Dave Tyler和Damian Peach的经验心得[求翻译]
首先是Dave Tyler主页：http://www.david-tyler.com
Firstly, with regard to the 'magic' processing: I use no exotic processing algorithms, in fact I only use Registax 3 and an old version of Photoshop - version 5, and PSP 5
Most people overprocess their images - there are thousands of ways of spoiling an image but only a few ways to get it right, depending of course on ones interpretation of "right".
As an illustration, the image below is the result of Registax aligning, stacking and mild wavelet sharpening. Then the resulting red, green and blue bitmaps were combined in photoshop to produce an RGB result. NO post-registax sharpening or processing was applied, just the combination of the 3 colours. You can even see, in this image, I have used a blue that was taken too late and is mis-matched due to rotation. The "niceness" factor in the assembled RGB image has to be preserved through to the finished image . As you can see, the differences in the finished image is subtle and difficult to "see" without cross reference to the initial RGB. The message in the final image is almost subliminal.
Its knowing that that next step is out there and attainable with the tools that you have, that is the "art". It is very easy to get lost searching for improvement.
Some of you have commented on the movie of Jupiter on my website, and even downloaded it and Registax'd it. This is not the origonal AVI , it is a lesser movie made from it.
This image was taken on April 14 2004 , in the UK, with an f12 8.375 inch Newtonian and a Toucam. Such seeing is as rare as hens teeth. You can see that getting good data is the key, and overprocessing this only spoils it. To image in good seeing YOU HAVE TO BE THERE when it occurs!
I suffer too from UK seeing , see the Last Jupiter image below taken on the 16th.
I hope that helps.
Best Regards
Dave Tyler
http://www.david-tyler.com
Here are the images:
First: Registax'd, RGB assembled - NO other processing:
http://www.david-tyler.com/images/ukai/jup-19-4-06_0334_bst_rgb.jpg
A red image:
http://www.david-tyler.com/images/ukai/jup-19-4-06_0334_red.jpg
The final result:
http://www.david-tyler.com/images/ukai/jup-19-4-06_0334_rgb_fin.jpg
Image from the UK on the 16th:
http://www.david-tyler.com/images/ukai/2006may16_2245_dbvt.jpg 接下来是 Damian Peach
I was most interested to read this long discussion which Ian showed me this evening. Its nice to know i am such a popular subject :-).
Firstly i can not contribute directly to the forum as i dont have the time really, so will try and cover as much as i can in this "statement:
I would like to try and answer some of the questions and comments made during this thread by various members. A couple of points to start with:
1. I have NEVER had a telescope directly hand picked from Celestron. My current C14 was a trade from a US observer who I know well, who had himself tested several C14s and chose this as the best one. It is a fine instrument certainly but is not of better optical quality than my C11, C9.25 or Dave Tyler's C14. My C11 and C9.25 were off the shelf at David Hinds.
2. There is no magical secret processing routine as so many seem to think. All of my images during the last 8 years - NONE have used an entropy or exotic processing algorithims. I tried many of these some time ago and did not like the results they produced. All of the sharpening isinregistax 3 and paintshop pro. I use R3, Photoshop 5 and PSP 5 to process all my images. I have been using these packages (excluding R3) for many years and know them well. I have never studied any graphical or imaging qualification at University.
3. My inspiration to image is driven by the scientifc interest that this data produces and what is learnt from it. I found one comment hillarious about along the lines of no real science was being done with the images produced!. I think that would insult many Planetary observers around the world. Just this year i co-authored a paper for the Icarus scientific journal on a jetstream acceleration discovered on Jupiter primiarly from my Barbados 2005 data set. I have long standing contacts at JPL to which i send my data for thier analysis also.
Lastly i want to cover in more detail how such images are achieved and truely what are the real factors.
Firstly 99% of observers do not realise just to what degree the atmosphere degrades thier telescope performance. Not until you have seen the Planets from the worlds best locations can you truly appreciate what is possible from typical amateur equipment.
Results like those achieved by Dave, Myself and others elsewhere seem "unreachable" to most.....it seems a mystery as to how someone using relatively modest equipment can produce such images. I felt EXACTLY this way upon seeing Thierry Legault and Don Parker's work back in 1997 when I started out.....surely there must be some processing tricks they aren't telling.....well, having known Don for years i can assure you all.....there are no secret tricks to this.
When some of you finally experience truely wonderful seeing with a perfectly collimated high quality telescope you will realise that such results ARE possible without any elaborate processing. In fact the finest data needs hardly any processing at all. There are so many ways you can process an image wrong, but to do it right takes hundreds of hours of experimenting and practice to train your eye to actually "see" what is there, and recognise when certain parameters of the image are not correct. There are so many images I see posted and sent to me that I can say what has been done wrong straight away, but the observer has not seen there error. Since my own work is highly regarded, what
I say must be mostly true and not simply my own bias that my images are the perfect template to compare against!. There is some fine work being produced by members in here.
People such as Paul Haese, David Pretorius and Ian himself are doing some very fine work indeed.
Refer to the attached file showing a raw image of Jupiter with no processing and one next to it with only a wavelet sharpen in registax. Nothing more has been done. This illustrates my point about truly great seeing from a properly calibrated telescope needs very little work.
In the end people's views and opinion's are their own and they are entitled to think what they wish. I have no interest in weeks of endless debate trying to explain it all in every detail. I have had many people visit me and I've shown them what I do and how. You can't train someone to take excellent quality images. I've put in thousands of hours of work during the last 9 years to perfect and learn the techniques. Very few people have the real passion and love for Planetary observing that I have, being out there every clear night - if they did there would be a hundred Damian Peach's out there :-).
Best Regards,
Damian Peach
http://www.david-tyler.com/images/ukai/peach_jupcomp.jpg 英文 哥 看不懂的说 求翻译阿。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。
楼主你反正没事，赶快翻译吧::070821_01.jpg:: 求翻译阿。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。
楼主你反正没事，赶快翻译吧 ...
linkage 发表于 2011-6-9 14:22 http://www.astronomy.com.cn/bbs/images/common/back.gif
我发帖是忙里偷闲，翻译就没时间了，赫赫 steveyzh 发表于 2011-6-9 13:59
接下来是 Damian Peach
简而言之, 高手数据处理都是非常简单的. 只用R6跟ps就够了. 没有特殊的后期处理技巧.
视宁是王道
不过这个是06年的帖子了. 近10年来的摄像头跟处理软件的发展又不一样了. 尤其是Winjopos的出现和使用
最近Darryl使用174mm拍摄跟处理土星的技巧是我研究的重点
求出处{:5_283:}
页:
[1]