IC 1396 in four flavours

[Mike Hawtin]

I've just finished playing with the data set for this one so here they all are warts and all in Ha, bicolour, HST and a synthetic L RGB, thanks for looking.

Mike

[xtreemchaos]

there all fantastic,but i do like the SynthLRGB the best,staggering colour and detail.thanks for sharing.charl.

[laudropb]

All very nice. Although it goes against the grain somewhat, I think I prefer the Synth too. Thanks for posting.

[swag72]

Last one for me (LRGB with synthetic Lum) as not only is the detail good, but you also have some great star colour in there. Hats off to you for trying different things - Nothing wrong with a synthetic luminance in my mind...... We do all we can to present the very best data and you have demonstrated that well

[michael.h.f.wilkinson]

The last one for me too

[Mike Hawtin]

Thanks for taking the time to comment folks.  Sara I was sort of forced into using Ha and OIII as the luminance as both my Borgs perform very poorly at the short end of the spectrum, especially considering they are marketed as astrographs.  You can just about get away with them if there aren't too many blue stars in the image with nebulosity behind them.  As a matter of interest I have measured the blue bloat of the 71FL at 60 arcsec on a 600 sec sub and that is on a mag 9 star, my 77ED II is even worse!  Phew, that's better, rant over.

Mike

[Michael-H]

Excellent work. The last one is certainly the esthetically most pleasing, but thanks for posting them all. It's good to see the process, or the variation, or what ever.

[Mike Hawtin]

Glad you like them Michael.

[Rudeviewer]

Love the 4th one!  I am about to purchase a qhy9 mono so good to see what they can do.