Gina

Thank you Ken It's roughly 3 degrees in diameter or 6 moons - bigger than the Great Andromeda Galaxy, M31. Yes, it's BIG!! My Flaming Star Nebula image is roughly to the same scale - both are slightly cropped to remove registration funny borders. I don't think the two areas overlap but I'll check in CdC.

Simeis 147 Ha capture finished for tonight and now capturing Ha for the Flaming Star Nebula. 60s exposures look right for a gain of 600 and set up for 300 subs which should go on to around dawn. Just hoping there's no fog. Next clear night I'll see about OIII. Now off to bed Here's a single frame lightly stretched in Ps.

Another interim result, this time using 62 2m Ha subs so just over 2hr imaging time. Again PI result saved as TIFF and post processed in Photoshop. Result should be better with the correct calibration files and some new flats. That should result in a better background. but anything left can be corrected with DBE.

I don't know - I tried the plate solving script in PI but it didn't work - probably need to find out how to use it

I'll continue capturing this for an hour or so then see if the Flaming Star Nebula has passed the meridian so that I can set up capturing to continue while I go to bed.

Here's an interim result - 23 2m Ha subs g600 -30C pre-processed in BPP with slightly wrong calibration files - I need to capture bias and dark frames for a gain of 600 (nearest ATM is with gain of 550). Then saved as TIFF and post processed in Photoshop with curves, slightly cropped and saved in PNG format for upload.

Here's a single 2m g600 Ha sub post processed in Photoshop. No calibration just Photoshopped with levels, curves and "Enhance DSO and Reduce Stars" in Noel's Actions.

Found Simeis 147 but it's very very faint. This is 120s g600 -30C auto-stretched. Used you navigation instructions, Ken

May give this capture a 1hr run as for the NAN and then see where my other targets have got to.

H+S SII 4m g600 -30C is showing some image when auto-stretched in PI

Still nothing even auto-stretched in PI. Moving on then... Heart & Soul next...

Collected 30 2m SII subs g600 -30C NAN and decided to see if IC1396 had any SII nebulosity. Can't see anything with same settings as NAN so trying 4m subs.

One advantage of higher gain is that the read noise is reduced. Sounds counter-intuitive I know but that's what the ZWO graph says. Of course thermal noise increase but so does the signal. This seems to be saying the using maximum gain is beneficial on weak targets. Takes a while to get one's head round these new CMOS sensors

Here's a comparison of 2m and 4m with gain of 600. The 2m one has better stars.

Gain of 600 brings in a bit more of the image but I think I prefer the 500 version so I've gone back to that. Here's a screenshot of both gains, auto-stretched. Might try g600 with 120s.

Maybe something starting to show but I don't want to go to much more than 4-5m or I'll start to get oval stars. Instead I've increased gain from 500 to the maximum of 600 and see if anything shows then.

Trying SII on the NAN but nothing to see with 120s = 2m subs so I'm trying 240s = 4m and see if anything shows

Dark now and the stars are out. Checked focus and the difference from the tree was just one count. Seeing causes variation around 2 or 3 counts so it's a matter of watching and adjusting focus for the overall tightest pixel pattern at 400% zoom in SharpCap. At that zoom individual pixels are visible. Next to sort out a target. NAN is currently at the zenith but I've done that except in SI where I couldn't see any image. Might just try that again.

In that case I would recommend going straight for the 3nm Ha filter rather than trying to save some funds by going for 5nm first like I did. The difference is significant and seems far greater than you would expect from changing from 5 to 3. At least I didn't buy the 5nm OIII Ha definitely brings out the most nebulosity as hydrogen is more prevalent than oxygen or sulphur (I'm stuck in the mud and refuse to use the "f" version ). Adding OIII give you a colour rendition and works quite well for most DSOs. SII is far less useful and most DSOs seem to have very little SII - still worth buying the 3nm version though so that the stars match up. Where available the SII brings out extra detail and more colours if you use the Hubble palette.

Ah yes. I too would like to automate focussing and that is something I plan to do but in the meantime my remote manual focussing works pretty well with my own DIY remote focuser. The control software was developed for a triple imaging rig which I've pretty much given up on so the focuser selector is redundant. I haven't bothered to alter the control software as the current version works well enough. Here is a screenshot of the observatory laptop via TeamViewer showing the tree on a far hill that I use to set focus up roughly ready for night-time use. It's about a mile away and I find this gives a good starting point. SharpCap is set at 200% and rig slewed such that the top of the tree is central in the FOV. My "Triple Remote Focussing System" window can be seen in front of the SharpCap window and as can be seen the focus hasn't changed much(Focus Count of 1).

If you have light pollution you need narrowband filters. They don't have to be the very best and most expensive - I've seen lots of good results with Baader filters. No idea how good the ZWO filters are - don't even know what they do. I'll stick with what I've got unless I hear of anyone doing better ones at little cost One good thing about the ASI1600MM-cool is that you can use 1.25" filters without worrying about vignetting (particularly with the filters close to the camera as with the ZWO filter wheel). If you want a suggestion I would recommend trying the Baader 7nm Ha filter - cheap and cheerful Good for a start if you're short of cash. I know Baader 1.25" filters fit the ZWO filter wheel - I use their LRGB filters.

Right - imaging rig back on mount and ready to go except that I'll have to check focus. Probably re-do the flats too. I reckon to re-do flats after moving the rig off the mount and back on.

I have imaged Simeis 147 before but the FOV was a bit lacking. And so was the camera resolution (460EX mono). I think my new rig could improve on previous results

I think the difference is that you're using a wideband filter - very wide - and I'm using a very narrowband filter - Ha 3nm Astrodon. Now that is quite some filter - best in the business I gather, and not cheap - almost half the price of the camera but "boy it gives results". I've spent more on the filters than the ASI1600MM-Cool. Yes, I'm going for imaging the Flaming Star Nebula tonight - it looks a very interesting object and well worth a good go at. I may have time to try Simeis 147 too - I'll see how it goes.

Tried extreme histogram stretch in Photoshop but there is indeed absolutely nothing there! Been thinking about things and I think Barnard's Loop can wait a bit - Orion is too low in the SE until late at night ATM and there seems to be "good pickings" at the present FOV. I've already taken the imaging rig off the mount to change lenses but I can easily put it back without changing lenses. I think that's what I'll do. The 135mm lens is a really good one and does seem to give better results than the 28mm.