Jump to content

Banner.jpg.b83b14cd4142fe10848741bb2a14c66b.jpg

Integrated Flux Nebula...

mftoet

By mftoet
in Imaging - Deep Sky

Recommended Posts

mftoet

mftoet

Posted
Posted

...and M81 & M82 hidden in it somewhere. Total integration time: 12 hours and 20 minutes with the "banana scope" and a Canon EOS 5D Mark II (Baader mod) @ Olly's dark site in Étoile-Saint-Cyrice. Imaging details van be found on my website.

ifn_140325_1000.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • Replies 29
  • Created
  • Last Reply
mftoet

mftoet

Posted
  • Author
Posted

Thanks!

Here is how it looks when you pull out the lightness channel (in Lab colour), invert the image, and boost the contrast. A lot of fine, subtle details can be seen in the IFN.

ifn_140325_contrast.jpg

It was a very difficult image to process. The circumstances in terms of transparency weren't very good, so there were lots of gradients I had to deal with. Did I mention it took my computer (P6200, 4 GB memory) 30 hours to stack the 148 subs (Winsorized Sigma Clipping in PI)? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
mftoet

mftoet

Posted
  • Author
Posted

Thanks for your comments.

@guillermobarrancos: I'm not sure what causes the extra spike. Recently somebody on SGL suggested me to remove the mirror from the DSLR in order to get rid of extra diffraction spikes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
peter shah

peter shah

Posted
Posted

Beautiful and super deep..... out of all the IF shots I've seen this has to be one of the deepest. You have also controlled your star colour very well its very easy to it wash out in the process......Olly will tell you how tricky it is he worked on his rendition for hours.....I'm still adding to mine I started a few years back. This has given me the kick I need to point the scope back at it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Coco

Coco

Posted
Posted

Outstanding, I've found myself visiting this image several times today :)

How on earth did you stack this lot, did you batch convert everything to .fit files first?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Shibby

Shibby

Posted
Posted

Amazing image, to achieve this with just 5min subs on a DSLR! I suppose this shows what can be achieved with dark skies and lots of patience.

You've even got plenty of lovely star colour considering ISO 1600 was used!

Link to comment
Share on other sites
mftoet

mftoet

Posted
  • Author
Posted

 Another thank you to you all! :happy7:

You've even got plenty of lovely star colour considering ISO 1600 was used!

There's an ongoing debate about whether it's best to use the "unity gain" ISO setting (for maximum dynamic range, unity gain for the 5D Mark II is reached at ISO 400) or a higher ISO setting. Keeping the exposure time and f-number the same, a higher ISO setting results in less noise in the shadows (at the cost of some loss in the dynamic range in the highlights). The reason for this is that read noise (expressed in electrons) decreases when the gain (ISO) of the amplifier increases. This is explained and demonstrated in detail on the following website: http://theory.uchicago.edu/~ejm/pix/20d/tests/noise/noise-p3a.html

According to me, ISO 1600 is the optimal deep-sky astrophotography setting for the 5D Mark II. At this setting the read noise of the camera gets as low as it can get (3.1 e- versus 6.9 e- at ISO 400).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue. By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.