IMHO, your edit nailed it (except the noise, but is just one click).
1 Like
Being from aurora territory I would say that one of the amazing thing with them is the incredible variety of shape, movement, saturation and colour. From very strong green to mainly purple. From dense slow waves to fast moving sky covering ripples. Im sure base colours are fixed to the green and purple but the mix of the two and the saturation makes for a lot of variety. I’ve seen very pale ones and very green ones.
1 Like
Glen,
I think this loses quite a bit of the faint detail though.
There really was a lot of light in the sky at this point.
Dang - how do you get the replies to go just below the comment you are replying to?
Interesting that your image shows both blue and violet on the rightmost streak of aurora.
I think pure blue is possible, but violet is more common (both caused by nitrogen atoms). At the time I could only see the violet.
aurora.borealis.pp3 (23.3 KB) RawTherapee (5.8 Development)
I don’t have the burden of knowing what these phenomena look like in real life. Love to see it for myself sometime.
So the colours I decided to use are based on a mix off what’s been said above and what looked nice to me…
2 Likes
Thats a pretty good take on it!.
Incidentally, for those into astronomy: In the top right you can see 5 of the bright stars that make up the handle of the constellation Ursa Major (aka the plough, the big dipper) The 4th star from the right is called Mizar, and is a double star which shows up pretty clearly on the photo. The fainter companion star is call Alcor and both are themselves double stars, although you need a decent telescope to see this.
I’m quite impressed that the lens resolved this pair of stars!
Yes, with just a curve to manipulate tone, it was a trade between color and the faint parts. I contemplated adding HSL saturation (the only color tool I have in rawproc), but to my thinking that becomes a colorimetric departure from the capture, so there… 
I don’t think you do in discourse, the forum software, unless there’s an option I haven’t found. When your reply ends up directly underneath the post, the ‘replied-to’ arrow and person don’t appear in your post; when your reply is separated from the post is when the ‘replied-to’ stuff is inserted. Tool a bit for me to get used to that, after using threaded-vs-flat in dpreview…
This question can be read in at least 2 ways. Glenn addressed one of them and if that was what you wanted to know you can stop reading 
You might want to know how to add a sentence/paragraph you want to comment on to your reply. The way I just did and the way Glenn did twice in the previous post. If that is the case:
If you select the text you want to reply to using the mouse Quote will pop up. Click on that and the text selected, including user info will be pasted into the reply box. You can do multiple selects, are not limited to quoting one user and can also quote yourself.
1 Like
Good put, and the only thing I feel compelled to add is to make sure you have selected the spot in your draft at which you want a quote to be inserted before you go back to the post from which to select the quote. The quote tool happily inserts the quote wherever your cursor is positioned, even in the middle of your well-crafted missive… 
1 Like
Yeah, very annoying when you forget about that!
Yes I did master the quoting system with a bit of help from one of the system bots.
In fact a misplaced quote can also be cut and pasted in the correct place in your message.
Yes - an amazing evening, and this was not even the best shot I took!
Well done to get the foliage just visible, but the dark blue sky is not right. It was moonless at midnight and the only illumination would be possible sparkles of aurora most likely greenish shaded.
That looks pretty good, but a couple of questions.
I notice you didn’t use the color calibration module, but just set the white balance module to “as shot” - is this just personal preference? In practice it didnt make much difference for this image, but color calibration gives a temperature 400K lower.
Regarding filmic - it looks like you chose White Relative exposure of 4EV, was that a personal choice? as pushing up to 6EV does reveal more of the fainter aurora
And lastly, I like the way you used the tone equalizer to darken the background night sky, and increase the contrast.
Just a word of caution regarding the various edits:
One should not change the colours of the aurora since the various colours are indicative of specific physical processes with atoms and ions.
Hermann-Josef
2 Likes
Although it looks like there is quite a range of colour frequencies that could result from each specific ion interaction.