Rodd

I used some old fsq SII and OIII data to render an HaSHO image. The stars are all TOA Ha.

Awesome. Smashed the warnings about imaging with extra glass in the light-path.

What would we do without Ha. The Moon was 98% and the transparency was pea soup. The Moon was red with a deep haze around it. The sky removed from the Moon seemed a bit thinner and some stars were visible, so I decided to proceed. Fortunately, seeing was good. The sky often appears hazy when the Moon is full when really its just Moon-wash. In my case, the reddish haze was localized to the south. I wanted to capture this target using the TOA 130 for a very long time and I finally got around to it. I think it makes a strong mono image but I am very much looking forward to completing this in a SHO palette and possibly an HaRGB or HaLRGB. I just wish I had a bigger sensor! TOA 130 with ASI 1600: 59 300 sec Ha.

I’m posting this to give hope to the frustrated imager who struggles with a turbulent sky, hesitating to make the decision to call it a night due to breezy, poor conditions. The night before, my total guiding rms error was around .4”. This night, no matter what I did - long guide subs, low aggressiveness, high aggressiveness, short guide subs, a range of min move values, recalibrations, changing guide stars, focusing guider - nothing worked. My total rms ranged from .77” to 1.06”. Needless to say, the fwhm of subs were higher than I like. Fwhm values started out around 4.2” and fell to 2.7” near the meridian, which was not bad, considering. I almost packed it in several times. I am glad I didn’t. I’ve never before known AP to be a forgiving endeavor. TOA 130 and ASI 1600. About 5 hour of Ha. My goal will be to collect more Ha, hopefully during good seeing, and replace some of the high FWHM subs. Meanwhile, I can live with this Ha mono.

I reprocessed the image to better affect (neurtralized background, removed star artifacts, slightly less aggressive). I must learn to avoid processing on zero sleep. The image can almost stand on its own, though I still want to add significant data, including 10 sec subs for the star cores, which I have yet to collect. The reason I decided to image this target was becuase I was never satisfiied with my first attempt, some 5 years ago. The data was lost when my bhard drice crashed, so I was not able to tinker with it. I included the original image . Original image of 5 years ago. This one was collected with the same scope butr with the old flatener and tghe STT 8300 camera

I am about 1/2 way there by my reckoning. Now I have to determine what data to add. More RGB, Luminance, Luminance and RGB. Opinions welcome. Seeing was pretty good for the R and G. Blue was less so. No Lum yet, but I did use a synthetic luminance. I've always thought this target to be difficult to get right. I think the plethora of stars and wide spread dust make having copious data necessary. TOA 130 and ASI 1600. About 12 hours of data.

Thanks Brendan. I need much more data. I like the crescent, but the background is lacking

Thanks Bob. I find this target to me amazing. I stll can';t believe we can take pictures of such things.

I know this one is too dark--but I think it looks bvetter on some of my monitors

I finally got a clear night and decided to add OIII to the Ha I previously collected for the Crescent Nebula. The decision was easy, becuase after this clear night it is forecasted to rain for a week. So, I decided to maximize the utility of a single night. This waay I could render a bicolor image instaed of collecting just another nights worth of mono that I wouldn't be able complete as an image for a long time. Seeing was poor, but seeing for the Ha was decent. I need much more of both to achieve what I envision, but this is a decent start. I always have trouble with background in bicolor images, and this one is no exception. Its not terrible, ust not as full as it should be. I am kind of stuck becuase I really don't like this target in the SHO palette. I like this one in Ha-OIII, which mimics RGB. Some nebula just have to be reddish/blueish IMO. I botched up the framing a bit. I wanted the soap bubble to be further in the frame. However, the FOV is restricted and if I pushed it further to the right, the main target wouldf be too close to the right hand edge. I need a 2600 camera. TOA 130 and ASI 1600. Ha: 37 300sec; OIII: 52 300 sec. About 7.5 hours. Need to triple it.

I kinda thought 8 hours was a bit light.

The data set is compromised somehow, which is not unusual for data from there. I’ll have another go at it and see if I can get the wrinkles out

That’s amazing processing, it looks almost exactly like a spider!😄

thanks Roy. Two things confound me, the differences in screens, and the differences in what my eyes see, which is dependent on how many breaks I take.

Well--never satisfioed. n Looks cartoonish, so I backed off the palette a bit