Kinch

Not the easiest target - not the best image of it.....but happy to have tamed all the stars in this area.....too may to count 🙂

This is 8 hours Ha + 7 hours each SII & OIII = 22 Hours.

I do recall saying on several occasions that I was not into 'cartoon colours'. This comes close (in my eyes). As I processed the data it more or less just jumped out at me like this - of course I played with curves etc. to end up with an image quite colourful for my style.....but that I actually like too!

It will go up on my web site later today - if anyone is interested in full details and higher resolution. (In brief: 8 hours Ha, 7 hours each SII & OIII...and then 3 hours of RGB thrown in.)

Yes - in general the stars are smaller via NB filters, most especially in the Ha. But as you see, this area is awash with stars and the best you can do is to reduce their overall impact on the image i.e. make the nebulosity stand out. Some areas are much harder than others and the veil is definitely on the hard half of the list.

This is mine from just over a year ago -  not the best but at the time, I was happy enough to get a finish on the images - because if you overdo it (star reduction) ...then the stars start looking like noise.

https://www.kinchastro.com/veil-nebula.html

30 minutes ago, BrendanC said:

I have a strong feeling most of the 'starless' veil images I've seen are taken using filters that just capture the nebula, not the stars.

No - I don't believe there are such filters that any amateur is using.

I see you have tried StarNet - surprised that did not work for you. Perhaps you can find another programme that I remember: Straton

I am not sure if that is a free programme or not - I have not tried it in years.

Sometimes things just come together beautifully - all equipment working in harmony, fantastic subject matter and superb processing of the data. This one ticks all the boxes for me. Great result/depth for less than 12 hours data 👍

Time to stop I think.....fantastic!👍

1 hour ago, discardedastro said:

but I think they should reduce the cost and make it a flat subscription model

Personally I would not mind that (if it was VERY cheap) but there are those that just will not pay subscription at any price......I see a post in a  short while ago (to SGP forum) saying that very thing.

Old saying....." You can't please all of the people all of the time". No matter what they do....there is bound to be someone complaining. On my understanding of how they are going forward.....I think they have chosen a good model. The software has been stable for me for a long time and when/if I subscribe to any additional functionality of an update package - it is purely my choice depending on what they are offering.  These updates will be few and far between - not like it has been in the past few years and with that in mind I really don't see them abondoning anyone who is not on the VERY latest as those without subscription will all be on the latest V2 or V3 (where any bugs reported will be removed).

36 minutes ago, discardedastro said:

they now have to fix every prior version and do new releases for them all, etc. If they don't, then your only way to fix a bug is to pay the upgrade cost and get back on the "most recent" train to receive the bugfix update.

This is from Jared..." Most of the changes do not go into affect until SGP4 is released. You will always get SGP3 updates at no cost or subscription for life.". 

If it is an actual BUG in the software - I have every confidence they will fix that too.....they have left that last one run long enough to find any of those bugs by now.

If you are not on SGP3 but on SGP4 (having paid a subscription)....then YOU have a full year to figure out if anything in the software is a bug for you/your system. 

Overall......I think they have done a good job in ensuring that they continue to receive remuneration for their ongoing work on the software - but we also get value for money.

EDIT: Just adding from the SGP website (and remember a 'subscription' will be "active" for a year)

Note that after purchase of SGPro, a subscription is NOT required in order to continue using it. The subscription entitles you to future updates and premium support, but, even if you decide let your subscription lapse, you will always be able to use some version of SGPro (specifically, you will be entitled to install and use the most recent version of SGPro that existed during you subscription's "active" period).

33 minutes ago, discardedastro said:

But it's £50 a year plus £100+ to start

I disagree. I think people are getting this wrong - or if I have it wrong, then I am quite happy to be corrected.

I bought SGP many years ago and have not paid them anything for the software in ....I don't know when. Perhaps in the middle of 2021 they bring out a major enhancement - say, controlling two scopes on one mount. If by that time I feel I need that enhancement, then I can pay a subscription and upgrade. (If I don't need that particular upgrade - then I won't pay out any money....my SGP continues to work as it is now). If I did pay for that 'upgrade' then that payment brings me any further upgrades and personalised assistance for 1 year (to mid 2022). If at that point, I decide not to pay a subscription again....then my SGP continues to work at the level where my subscription has expired. (N.B. We are all at 'Subscription Expired level now....i.e. no further upgrades until we pay a subscription).

Following from the above....I am working away at the end of 2022 and they bring out another big upgrade - supporting 3 scopes on the mount....and I really want that. Then, my expired subscription (since mid 2022) can now be updated with a new subscription....that will last until the end of 2023.

The subscription is NOT yearly....it is only required when YOU need to get new features from a new updated version of the software. Like I said in my last post...if I don't need any new features...I can continue using the version I have now without ever having to pay any subscription.

At least....that is how I have read what the DEVS have said...

23 minutes ago, Adreneline said:

Well I sincerely hope that's not any time soon!

I hope the same.....but I have my own reasons 🤣

7 minutes ago, Geordie mc said:

Could this be the end for SGP? 

Not for this user. I have paid for SGP and I can use what I have paid for until I 'keel over'. There is no need to pay a subscription if there is nothing new in SGP that you do not wish to use. The version you have now is supported forever. 

I thought I might as well put this up - it will be separate thread now when I finish the NB image. I did mange to get 1 hour each Green & Blue but only 51 minutes of Red (...dawn arrived) and have been playing with those ...mixing them in with the 5 hours of Ha above. I combined the RGB to make a Lum and then combined LRGB with the Ha in PixInsight scripts. I then played around mixing different combinations (this is why I love Pixel Math in PixInsight) and adjusting curves &  histograms until I got something that I thought was OK. For an RGB image or even an HaRGB image it should have much more RGB time.......but my final goal is really a Narrow Band image where I hope I can pull some good detail out in the final pic.

15 minutes ago, MarkAR said:

Looks like some really good data you've got.

Yes - It was a good clear & dark night......I'll be sitting in the wings  a while waiting for the next one though. (I have 3 hours of RGB....just playing with that at the moment).

OK - managed 5 hrs Ha for the night. Having a closer look this morning.....and quite pleased with the detail. 

(FSQ130ED with FLI ML16200 @1.9 ArcSec/Pix)

It is 5 years since I captured data for the Heart Nebula. Starting afresh....and happy with the 1st 3 hours of Ha data that has come in. (It will take some time to finish this as the forecast (cloud cover) is bad for some days to come). 

8 minutes ago, steppenwolf said:

A very nice wide field image, thank you for linking to it. I like your mono version as well.

As above - you have some lovely detail which really stands out in the mono image 👍..... NICE!

2 minutes ago, andrew s said:

Is that a PN bottom left?

No....:  The small blue object, is Abell 71. The nebula is also cataloged as PK 085+04.1, PN G084.9+04.4 and Sh 2-116. Initially cataloged as a planetary nebula, the object is now recognized as a small patch of HII emission.

Indeed - even with all that 'activity' it is quite a hard capture - but you have brought it out beautifully. (My effort here: https://www.kinchastro.com/sh2-115.html....if you are interested)

Well done Carole 👏 - I have had a go at this one and it is not at all easy to bring that 'Shark' out.  

Yes- it is difficult indeed. Perhaps (and just perhaps) I see a slight difference here on a high resolution monitor - but then again, it may be just the processing steps that caused the difference.

Bottom line for me.....I don't think it is worth spending the time gathering Lum data if you gather your RGB un-binned. (I don't do much broadband imaging - so I am no expert -  but there is nothing here to show me to do things differently than I have previously with RGB images).

Tonight - before the clouds appeared, I was able to get 1½ hours of Lum data. This image is now LRGB = total 6 hours.

On the 1st image above, I had combined the RGB data into a Lum to add in. (I work in PixInsight). So it was in fact an LRGB image with just 1½ hours each of RGB. This one goes that next little step:  1½ hours each of LRGB. There is a slight improvement but to my mind not a whole lot.....and in truth, that may just be that I took more care in the processing. I am still in two minds, whether or not, if gathering RGB @ 1x1, whether or not it is actually worth spending the time to get Lum data!

32 minutes ago, Allinthehead said:

Broadband is so much more difficult especially from poorer skies

You can say that again. "Broadband is so much more difficult especially from poorer skies".....there, I just said it for you 😉

In general the sky here is not good enough for me doing BB - unless shooting very high......and after midnight when some close neighbours put their outside lights off. This target could fall into that category...when these clouds lift. 🙄

As it is, 1½ hours each RGB is a lot for me....I generally just gather RGB for star colour if needed to help a NB image. This time, I just went that little further because the moon had not apppeared and in truth, at the time, I was not thinking of doing an RGB image. Maybe if I do get a chance (while still aiming for a NB image in the end)...I might go for some Lum data to see if it will help detail on the above.......................now that you have put the idea in my mind.

Wow! Such a wide field shot. Won't take you long to have your full sky covered 😏

Thanks for the comment....it is odd how images lie with each of us differently. I still stand by  what I said...it will never be one of my favourites and I am 100% sure that some NB images that will tick all the boxes for me will by be utter rubbish in the eyes of other imagers. I guess it is what we grew up with and what we are used to. Imaging for the most part, in a light polluted area, NB was always the way to go for me and now, when it comes to processing BB data, I feel that I am lacking in the necessary skills......because what I see is not pleasing to my eyes.

After all that - so happy that you like this one. I would not have put it except that when I went to look at what else is out there...well OK, it is not the worst. Like I said about a previous image of mine....I reckon I can get away with this  🤣

Because this is an RGB image, I am afraid, no matter what, it will never be one of my favourites. But some might like it....(though in truth the processing could be improved on with more effort).

1½ hours each - RGB = 4½ hours with FSQ130ED , Astrodon RGB filters and FLI ML16200 camera. (This is a crop from the full image I hope to complete in NB).