Kinch

2 hours ago, newbie alert said:

Superb, I like your style in processing.. lots going on but nowhere near in your face... great job

Thanks for saying so....😀

1 minute ago, MarkAR said:

Superb image.

Thank you Mark 👍

41 minutes ago, rubecula said:

Wonderful image, I love the colour rendition.  I'm about to rework my version of the Trunk based on processing knowledge people have given me here recently.  So I'm looking forward to seeing the full details on your website.

Update:  Just had a detailed look at your website (my first time, very impressive, lots of information, beautifully presented).  Your images are really outstanding and your site is a pleasure to browse.  I'm in awe.

Thanks so much Robin....glad you found the site interesting. In the early days, putting the site together was a lot of work.....now just adding the images as they come only takes an hour maybe.....as I put the info in and update links. Weebly is a free site hosting facility.....it was a great project for me....taking plenty of time but not costing anything.

(I have one page that still needs updating re my present camera. Note to self:...."get it done next week"! )

1 hour ago, carastro said:

Great image.  I bet you have some awesome skies in Spain. 

Carole 

Hi Carole, yes there are some great skies in Spain.....BUT not where I am unfortunately. When I moved to Spain I was not into astro-photography at the time. If I was...I would not have bought near the coast and most especially not along the southeast coast. I am plagued with both high humidity and bad light pollution......AND....no chance that my wife will consider a move just so that I can get better night skies. What to do.....I just make the most of it when I can and stick (for the most part) to narrow band imaging.

2 hours ago, alan potts said:

Lovely image as good as any I have seen of this .

Alan

Thanks Alan - appreciate the comment.

Normally my NB images take me a week or quite often more to complete, start to finish. This is one of the fastet I have ever done - started Wednesday night and processing completed on Friday afternoon. Two x  full night's data did the trick nicely! A total of 11 hours & 40 mins. (Full info & higher resolution on my web site).

Well done Richard - looking good 👍. Good to know that the filter is now "at work". Interesting for some of us 'old school' guys  to see the result when using this type of filter.........such short overall exposure too!

I have done a little bit of experimenting ....I hope you can go have a look on Telescopius...where I was having some conversation with Rodd.   (https://telescopius.com/pictures/view/64641/deep_sky/IC/1311/bright-nebula/by-kinch?revision_id=91734)    I hope the link is allowed and left.

3 minutes ago, ultranova said:

What scope and camera set up was you using

Hi Paul.....thanks for commenting.

This is with the Tak FSQ130ED and FLI ML16200 camera. Very shortly, I am going to fire up PixInsight again and this time, I will try adding the NB data to the RGB image.......if it makes an interesting change and is OK, I will post that also. While out walking the dog just now....I was thinking about it and wondering if it would be better or worse 

Originally planned as an SHO image - but there was little or no OIII in this area. Ended up as a bi-colour (HSS=RGB) with RGB imported into the stars only. IC 1311 is the small open star cluster in the top right quadrant. Full details on my web site.

Nice one 👍

26 minutes ago, x6gas said:

I like that you appear to have left a bit of green in the nebulosity

Thanks for the comment......I like to leave a 'touch' of green when I can.....I think it helps the depth of an image. This time, I more or less had to, because otherewise the Crescent looked too blue......whereas, for this palette, Blue/Green looks much better.

Martyn..........thanks so much for that. Glad you enjoyed the higher resolution image - I go back from time to time to this (and others that I have on the web site) just to "wander" around in deep space and try get my head around what is out there 

Robin & Mark.....thanks for the comments guys. Yes.....sometimes on wide views we get a different perspective on things that we have been always looking close in on. I think, once we just don't go for colour blobs, but try to resolve the detail....even on very wide FoV images....they can prove to be very interesting.

Thanks Martyn. No worries....I make my images for Pixel Peepers 🤣.......I am afraid I am one myself!

If you do not know it already....you must click on 'Download full size' to actually see the full res image in telescopius.....then when you have the  little + sign....you can click on the image again to get it.....the one I put up is 4470 x 3600.

8 minutes ago, Richie092 said:

I really like this. Thanks for sharing.

Thank YOU Richie....I appreciate the comment.

By the way....if you get to look at the high resolution version.....you might happen upon the Soap Bubble - not very strong, but there. Also.....this tiny little fella;  Abell 69 👀

I could not upload this image earlier today - not sure if it will go now until I hit the "Submit" button.

It is related to my prior posted image - which is a crop from this one. I could not use the same colour palette on this full one as Crescent came out blue....whereas Blue/Green is more in keeping with the Hubble Palette end colour.

It is nice to look at this one in high resolution....you can find the largest image on Telescopius....uploaded today, so should not be too hard to find.

38 minutes ago, x6gas said:

I've come to expect a lot when I click on one of your threads

Arrgghhh.....I'll have to stop posting.....I am doing this for fun....I don't need the pressure   😰

......just kiddin'....thank you so much for saying that Ian.

Further to my last post....I don't seem to be able to upload another image....I must check my quota!

The full image - hi resolution - can be found on my web site (url as per my signature).

Hi Martyn, thanks for the comments. My initial hesitation with the full image was due to the Hubble Palette mapping. I am used to seeing the Crescent Nebula in Red/Salmon colours so when it comes out in Green & Blue in the final full image, it really is off-putting. But, since Ha is mapped to green and OIII mapped to blue....then one should not expect anything different!

When I did the crop above, I was able to play with the colours to make that section look more pleasing to the eye (for me anyway). When I did that, The Crescent (in the full image - that you have not seen yet) comes out blue.....and I could not go with that. So....bottom line: the above image is fine as is....no more exposure time needed.The full image will show this area more green (again, overall ok without needing more data). This more green full image just took me some time to get used to ... but I will put t up on my website later and leave a link (and thumbnail version here)....to explain better.

4 minutes ago, vlaiv said:

I'm glad you decided to process your data after all. Nice image!

Agree 100%. 👍

This is a crop from an image I am presently working on. Just cannot decide (for the full image) if I need extra data or not.  It is the overall colour though that needs attention.

For this area though....the data looks fine (I think) : Ha-36 subs, SII-32 Subs & OIII-31 Subs (all 10 minutes).

There really can be no answer from us looking at two JPEGs. If you are doing long subs in excellent conditions - then, as you see, a bunch of them will not pull out  too much more detail. You will get a better SNR with the stack but if there is not too much noise in the single sub.....well there is only so much that stacking will do with that too. Only to be expected I think........but each target will be different.

I have often planned many hours of subs on targets only to stop at half my planned amount - simply because I knew many more hours would not make a huge difference. Now, (you may have noticed from my posts), I test what I have from time to time....after 3 hours of data; after 5 hours of data.....whenever it is convenient to have a look (and not at any set points). Sometimes it is just not worth getting  say 10 + 10 + 10 hours of SHO.....but you may find your time is better spent with e.g 8 hours Ha + 12 hours SII + 10 hours OIII.....or whatever....depending on the signal from the object you are shooting.

I don't necessarily agree that the single sub here is clearer and deeper. You say you have just done STF. The stacked image I would imagine will lend itself better able to be processed than the single sub....I am sure the fine detail is there to be drawn out. Just perhaps it is a fact....that you did not need 10 hours of subs to get it!

Have fun and enjoy the journey. Perhaps it will be clear again for me tonight (I have 3 different images needing more data)....but in the meantime I have lots of work to do in the garden!

4 minutes ago, MarkAR said:

You know you're going to have to fill the gaps now.😇

🙄...It is looking that way...but I will resist the temptation (I hope) until I can plan it all properly.