Astrophotography Image Processing Made Super Simple!
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 26 сен 2024
- Follow as I process the Dumbbell nebula using only levels and curves adjustments in GIMP (absolutely nothing else!) This video is the perfect foundation for those new to processing deep sky images in GIMP or Photoshop.
You can download GIMP for free below: (I'm not affiliated with GIMP in anyway, I'm just a keen user)
www.gimp.org/d...
If you appreciate the content please consider my Channel Membership, Patreon, or you can treat me to a coffee with the link below:
Patreon: www.patreon.co...
www.buymeacoff...
**All music on my channel is licensed through Story Blocks**
First Light Optics (affiliate)
*Beginner Telescopes*
www.firstlight...
*Telescopes In Stock*
www.firstlight...
*Offers*
www.firstlight...
*General Telescope Section*
www.firstlight...
*Mounts*
www.firstlight...
*Cameras/Astrophotography*
www.firstlight...
*Eyepieces*
www.firstlight...
*Filters*
www.firstlight...
*Accessories*
www.firstlight...
*Binoculars*
www.firstlight...
M27 data consists of 20 x 30 second exposures using a ZWO asi585mc camera and Takahashi fc100dc telescope, stacked in deep sky stacker.
Finally, someone who actually knows Gimp, thank you sir 🙏
Hey woody, you're welcome :) I've certainly put the hours into that program lol
Thankyou Chris for showing a fumbling novice how to work a little bit of magic. Being new to all this I appreciate people such as yourself who've put the hours in make this information available to us all 👍
Glad it was helpful John! and it's fun to share what you know.
Thanks. Post processing can be so complicated. You’ve really simplified the process. Much appreciated.
This is one of the best tutorials for astrophotography beginners I have seen on RUclips. I am a pretty tech savvy person, but being a newbie to this hobby, I have found the steep learning curve for a lot of the astrophotography software to be frustrating and intimidating. I actually learned skills from this video that I can use moving forward. I appreciate your efforts.
Exactly the video I've been looking for, know nothing about processing pictures and something explained in plain English will make it so much easier for me and a lot of other beginners, thanks for putting the time and effort into your videos, just have to wait for my Seestar to arrive and I can have a go myself 👍
My pleasure Andy, Cheers!
Super helpful! Lots of tutorials gloss over the initial pit in your stomach when you get the black screen with just a few stars, so I thought there was something wrong with my camera. Thanks so much!
Great tutorial Chris would be good if you would share more of you knowledge with us about using gimp for astro imaging
Thanks so much Tony, I would be happy to make more GIMP videos. I'll pop the odd one in here and there :D
Great video, thank you. As a newbie Astro photographer, this was a great demo for me.
Glad it was helpful!
I can see this is going to be very helpful to people that are new to this hobby.. good video chris
🌃
A very good tutorial. I use those exact programs and it just so happens I recently imaged M27 and was struggling possessing it . The tutorial got me a good image Thanks.
That's good to hear!
Thank you - that was great - you make it look so simple! Im looking forward to trying this
Hey Martin, that's really good to hear! I hope you have fun when you give it a go : )
Wonderful intro; nice and simple!
Cheers Doug!
Ty for this very useful. More gimp stuff please :)
Thank you 👍
Brilliant
Realy nice Work👍🏻. I have got the same refractor and camera for planetary. Maybe i should give it a try on deep sky objects. Did you use the flattener?
Greatings from Germany 🙋🏻♂️
Hey welcome! I can recommend giving it a go :) there is no real need for a flattener with the small IMX585 sensor when used with the relatively flat optics of the Tak 100dc. No flattener was used here :)
I’m new to not only astrophotography but just general image processing. I’ve got personal photos that I’ve tried improving but never really understood what levels and curves could do. This tutorial has been helpful for even my general photography. I’m just getting to the point in my astrophotography journey where I’m learning how to use ASIAir to capture images and let ASIAir stack them. I would like to now move on to a software program, I’m going to try Seril, to see how it stacks then try to use it’s image processing tools. I guess levels and curves functions are included in the all the astrophotography tools. Would it be better to learn something like Gimp vs Seril at first?
You can use both if you wish. I use everything from Siril to Gimp, Affinity Photo, (for planets: Pipp, Autostakkert, Registax and also Astrosurface) and, while I found Siril a pain at first, it was simply my ignorance at never having used any of these programs (the more you do, the easier it gets). Siril is excellent once you're used to it and using Starnet ++ within it, is really excellent. I normally use Siril for stacking deep sky stuff, do some initial processing (Background removal and Green removal) then Starnet and process the starless tiff file (saved from the fits file - don't worry you will get used to all of this. I did even with a serious lack of patience) in Affinity (or Gimp), then recombine the processed image with the stars image in Siril. It depends on the object and also how good my initial capture is. Treat it as a fun learning curve - with frustrations initially - and you'll start enjoying what you can do with it all. If you're like me, though, you'll bang your head against a wall for a few weeks.
Nice to hear you found this little video useful, and it's a good question regarding Deep Sky stacker then GIMP vs Siril. I would watch a couple of tutorials for both and see which seems more straight forward to you. I have little experience with Siril so I might be a tad biased towards GIMP.
My problem is that every thing straight from the Seestar that I open in Gimp weather it is a Fit file, or a saved Tiff file Gimp always opens them in black and white. While working with the Tiff file there was no green, red, or blue data at all. The only way it showed data was in the value tab and it was all black and white only. I could make the background green, red, or blue but could not do anything with the red in the nebula. I have no clue why this is but I have been trying it for a long time. I am going to just keep using Siril!
I am new to astrophotography and have been hesitant to dive into processing software. I've tried out Siril but find it somewhat difficult. GIMP looks easier to me. I'm using a Seestar in Bortle 2 night skies. So I'm getting clean sharp images that frankly look great without processing. But I want to take it to the next level. Do you know of any on line tutorials on GIMP? Or perhaps classes or on line lessons? Thanks again.
Will this work for milkyway?
Thank you so much for sharing this when astro processing seems to be very complicated. I have question.. as a dslr user and get lot of noise, I would use graxpert for denoising before or after GIMP?. Thank you and CS.!
You're welcome :) And I think you would stretch the image in GIMP which would reveal the gradient and noise, which you would then remove with graxpert.
@@Astrolavista ok thank you very much...!!!
Hi! I've seen quite a lot of hardware on your channel, so, mabe you can share a bit of your experience. I have a solid beginner scope for a year a so, which is (its 70/700 meade refractor, which is same to SW 707 az2) and im looking into buying "the one scope to rule them all". Well, as far as my sanity allows. Its much likely to be 200mm sky-watcher reflector. The thing is i want to pair it with EQ5 and there are two major kinds of sky-watcher 200s: with FLs of 1000mm and 1200mm. The 1200mm one exceeds EQ5 weight limit and considered to be dobsonian-mounted or used with super expensive high-end EQs, 1000mm is just fine for EQ5 with actually some room to play. Obviously, im targeted on 200/1000mm. And im looking for some advise regarding differences between 1200 and 1000mm focal lenghts. Can you give me some? Pros and cons of shorter FL, may be some caviats. Thanks.
Having owned and used a Sky-Watcher 200p f/6 Dob and now the 200p f/5 on an EQ5 there really isn't much between the two in terms of optics. It's only when for you go down to the 200p f/4's that things change and you need precise collimation and more expensive eyepieces, coma corrector to cope with the steeply curved light. If you want to be able to track objects i.e. add a motor drive or goto kit go for the 200p f/5 EQ5, and if you want a quick setup and are happy to nudge the scope around the sky go with the f/6 Dob :)
@@Astrolavista So, you say that shorter tube (200/1000) is ok to mount on eq5. EQ for me is the main goal since i dont want to deal with alt-az in any shape or form AND tracking upgrades for dob are hella expensive. I will want to have tracking eventually, so...
@@angeltensey Yes, sometimes use a 200p f/5 on my EQ5. Not problem other than the eyepiece position being awkwardly placed sometimes.