m42 Orion and Runni...
 
Share:
Notifications
Clear all

2023-09-16: APP 2.0.0-beta23 has been released !

Improved performance again, CMD-A now works in macOS File Chooser, big improvement for bad column cosmetic correction, solved several bugs

We are very close now to  releasing APP 2.0.0 stable with a complete printable manual...

Astro Pixel Processor Windows 64-bit

Astro Pixel Processor macOS Intel 64-bit

Astro Pixel Processor macOS Apple M Silicon 64-bit

Astro Pixel Processor Linux DEB 64-bit

Astro Pixel Processor Linux RPM 64-bit

m42 Orion and Running Man Sonya7s Esprit 150

6 Posts
3 Users
2 Likes
315 Views
(@maadscientist)
White Dwarf
Joined: 6 years ago
Posts: 8
Topic starter  

Wow, the posted image is a lot worse resolution than it is. Any recommendations as to size to prevent compression? First image is 999 wide, second is 1920. Both are terrible here. 

m42eSPRIT150SonyA7SBlend02 01 2019DanLlewellyn999

?

Messier 42 the Great Orion Nebula with the Running Man Nebula (Sharpless 279). This was old data taken on my Esprit 150 and Sony A7s on February 1, 2019. It consists of two stacks. One for the faint areas, 6 - 2 minute subs with an Orion LPR and 3 - 2 minute subs STC DUO filter and one for the core, 6 - 4 second subs. I still managed to blow the core out slightly, haha. Click on the image for a larger, sharper version and pan around.

m42eSPRIT150SonyA7SBlend02 01 2019DanLlewellyn1920

 

This topic was modified 8 months ago 2 times by Maadscientist

   
Andy Booth reacted
ReplyQuote
(@vincent-mod)
Universe Admin
Joined: 6 years ago
Posts: 5701
 

If you right click on the image and open it in a new tab, is it then the right resolution? The inline images are indeed compressed.


   
ReplyQuote
(@maadscientist)
White Dwarf
Joined: 6 years ago
Posts: 8
Topic starter  

@vincent-mod If I right click on image that is 999 and open image in new tab, it presents as 740x510. It is better than just clicking on the image,, but not full size, which is 999 x 689. The HD image(the second one) is 1920 x 1325 and opens in a new tab as the same 740x510 but much worse. If you click on the first image and use the arrow button on the right to get to the second image, it presents in the correct size, but resolution is lost. I'm going to post one resized to 740 and see if that solves it. The HD (1920 x 1325) image I posted is only 444 KB. There should be no need to compress it. Below is the resized image to 740. You need to actually click on the image for the best sharpness and presentation.

m42eSPRIT150SonyA7SBlend02 01 2019DanLlewellyn740

 

This post was modified 8 months ago by Maadscientist

   
ReplyQuote
(@vincent-mod)
Universe Admin
Joined: 6 years ago
Posts: 5701
 

No, not really indeed. I'll ask Mabula about it

 


   
ReplyQuote
(@maadscientist)
White Dwarf
Joined: 6 years ago
Posts: 8
Topic starter  

@vincent-mod Thanks. I posted my resized image to 740, and it looks a lot better. I noticed in the gallery that everyone else's images all look compressed too There might be a file size limit of 740 x 740 and anything above that is compressed. Given potential customers of APP probably look at the gallery, you certainly do not want their images to be compromised!


   
ReplyQuote
(@mabula-admin)
Universe Admin
Joined: 6 years ago
Posts: 3815
 

Hi @maadscientist,

I have upgraded the forum software and have also upgraded the attachment limits. You can now upload files of 50MB large (was 30MB). The image dimensions and JPEG quality were very limiting factors indeed. These are now much better and should allow images to be uploaded without clear loss of quality. The thumbnail previews can be 2000x2000 with 90% JPG quality, and the actual image can be 100% JPG quality and have max height of 4800 pixels.

Feel free to re-upload your images and let us know if it is indeed much better now 🙂

Mabula


   
ReplyQuote
Share: