The result of 1 minute of work in RawTherapee. Image, taken with unmodded Canon 350D+Tair-3 (1/4.5, F=300mm, nonAPO telelens) calibrated and stacked in freeware DeepSkyStacker. RawTherapee offers distinct advantages over other raw converters I have tested, producing images with smaller stars, color to the cores of stars, even saturated stars, finer detail in nebulae and galaxies, and lower apparent noise. At some point the question has to be asked regarding processing of how far it departs from original frame information, becoming essentially a reconstituted photo based on some programmer's "artist's conceptualization." Then open for post-processing in Raw Therapy, which has far more processing tools and options. I have been using Raw Therapy Linux distribution for processing astrophotos for some time. I've never used Photoshop, so I cannot compare the two. I use Nebulosity to acquire deep sky images, stack, and adjust as much as it can, then export, saving as a lossless 16-bit TIFF file. Then open for post-processing in Raw Therapy, which has far more processing tools and options. Results (more being added all the time) can be seen at. Raw Therapy Linux offers very sophisticated and powerful 16-bit loss-less processing, and is very stable. Processing parameters can also be named and saved, then batch applied to any future photographs as a starting point with one click. I'd be interested to see if anyone else is using RT for processing. I did not know about the existence of RawTherapee until I read your post and the previous posts in this thread. Right now, my workflow is similar to yours, except that when I leave Nebulosity, I bring my image into GIMP for final processing, which, of course, involves the loss of data due to GIMP's 8-bit color depth. I am intrigued by what I have read so far about RawTherapee.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |