Kinch

I posted an image in this Imaging Challenge (#29) - then later realised that data capture commenced outside the allowed dates. I do not see a means of deleting the entry. Mods. please go ahead & delete it - no further comment required.

I mentioned in a previous post that my 2nd favorite target was Thor's Helmet. I have done it with FSQ106 but the FSQ130 allowed me to improve (in my opinion) on the detail I could pull out. I have seen some fantastic & detailed images of Thor's Helmet with quite large scopes - but I am extremely happy with what I managed with a 5" refractor. Again - not my most recent image - but 1st time showing it here on SGL. This with FSQ130 & FLI 6120 camera: Total 15 Hours: Ha, OIII, R, G, B.

I was SO sorry you asked .... 🙄 But NOW....I am glad....because I have learned something new tonight 👍 😃

There is a very subtle difference here - just a first run using the Paste then Eraser tools (but I did go back to PixInsight to tweak things....could not help it 🤣). At least, now I have a method and my thanks to Dave and Richard for responding.

Thanks Richard. Later tonight (no chance of doing any imaging ☹️) I will have a closer look at what both Dave & you have sent. Looking forward to trying to improve this image because M32 really bugs me every time I look at it!

I will look closer at this, this evening. I think what I have to do with the Andromeda image should not be too hard....I guess I will only be working with two layers (two images). I am not 100% about that - but will know better after I try my hand at actually doing something - hands on - in Photoshop. Thanks for the link....I have a bit of reading to do 🙂

Sorry Dave.....was there supposed to be a link with that post?

Thanks for that offer - I am sure there are more than me here that would benefit and enjoy learning some new processing steps. Whenever you have the time..........👍

Thanks Richard - I may get to try that later today. I do have Photoshop.....but rarely even open the program as I never got to grips with it. (I have used PixInsight right from the start). Now looks that I would do well to learn a bit more than just playing with the curves/colours in PS 🤔. Thanks for the tip - much appreciated.

Thanks Carole. For me in SE Spain....I have some advantage on you for this one! This and Thor's Helmet were two targets that always fascinated me - I think because they were very 'early on' targets when I started imaging. Agree 100%....this area looks so different in "just" Narrow Band....perhaps one of the reasons I like this image myself....I can see 1st hand, what playing around with the data can achieve. I did not like pure RGB - I did like the NB ....but I love the mix 😍. Kinch.

Since I have been a little late to the party....I am guessing that perhaps there will be no objection to putting up images here that are not exactly new - but are new to this forum; meaning some may not have seen them before. This particular one is my favourite because everything just came together right. It is a mix of 40% narrow band data with 60% broadband data. Data is from March last year and full info @ http://www.kinchastro.com/ngc-2327-seagull-nebula-hasho.html What I like: the detail from the NB filters mixed with the colour from the BB filters. The conditions were good and the stars just shine nice in RGB colours. Putting things together in a 40/60 mix was fun and even over a year later, I still enjoy looking close in on this image. I hope you will too. Kinch.

The big one for me - and I hate to say it....because your eye will be drawn to it - M32 should not be so bright in comparison to the center of M31. To try bring detail as far in as I could in M31, the 'HDR Multiscale Transform' tool was used in PixInsight which reduces the galaxy core brightness......but I feel that the galaxy core should still be brighter than its small neighbour. This hits me everytime I look at it - but I don't know how to dim M32 on its own (....and perhaps M110 some also).

Yes - I know there are some negative points that can be raised about this image - but for once....I am thinking positive 😃 This was from a bad night at the end of 2017 and I did not think I could make an image with the data I took home. My goal was a colour image, which I did, but recently realised that putting the data into solely mono form....well... it just worked better. I hope you can look at it.....and see the 'positives'.......

Thanks for the comment Alan. The cluster was not really the subject of the original shot - it was a wide fov image with the Tulip Nebula at one end. The nebulosity here, although very evident was always hard to make anything of....it just was dull and boring. The amount of small stars also makes this quite a challenging area for an image - if they are too prominent they take over the frame; if reduced too much, they just look like noise. Last night, I was just playing with the data and although I came up with an overall not very exciting image, it was a result - it is only when one looks very close in that the merits of the work might come through. This is what I said on my FaceBook page: NGC 6871 - a very small star cluster....but I was more interested in pulling out some detail from the surrounding area and mixing in RGB stars with the narrow band data. This is a crop from a larger image......just playing with PixInsight. 🙂 I will just add - that if anyone is interested : the full fov image in reasonably high resolution is here: http://www.kinchastro.com/uploads/5/1/5/9/51595789/tulip_nebula_area_signed__3318_x_2205_.jpg

You don't hear much about NGC 6871 - it is a pretty small cluster.....but I just liked how this turned out. It is a crop from a larger image. NGC 6871 is a small, young open cluster in the constellation of Cygnus. The cluster has less than 50 members, most of which are blue and white stars. It is located 5135 light-years from Earth.

That is a beauty. You have been doing what I always wanted to try with my extender - not a patch on twin 152's - that is, to go after quite a few of those faint PNs. If I ever do get around to trying some more of them.....now I have a ready pile of images to go compare with (and try emulate). Brendan.

I know I said that I don't go for a lot of colour - with this bi-colour though, I seem to be contradicting myself. However, it really is just two main colours.....on top of black & white.... Full info : http://www.kinchastro.com/veil-nebula.html

I don't think it needs any more data - It shows nice depth, the colour is really appealing and the stars are great. Overall - a great job I would say!

Thanks guys for the comments. All going well there will be more posts in the months ahead.....I am still finding my way around this (huge) resource and trying to figure out how best to keep an eye on all the posts. 👀

Not sure exactly which driver you have but the one available via the ASCOM site (at the bottom of the page: https://ascom-standards.org/Downloads/ScopeDrivers.htm) should do the trick. If not - or if you still have problems, I am willing to try help out (you can PM me). I have an EM400 and can use both an older version of the SKY X st the same time as PHD2. Kinch.

I have been looking in on this forum for quite a long time - but it as not a place where I posted much. Perhaps I never thought I had much to contribute. It is time to come in..... and make a contribution. My interest is in astro-photography rather than visual. I live down the road (long road) from one of the esteemed contributors here, Sara Wager. That is another way of saying that I image from SE Spain - which is not as good as some may think but for sure, way better than anywhere in the British Isles. I am semi-urban which means that most of my images are in Narrow Band. A real necessity but also, for me, a joy to work with. Most of the time, my goal is to pull out as much detail as I can and colour is of secondary importance. In fact, I much prefer muted colours rather than the strong eye-catching colours that grab the headlines. Thus, you may never have seen any of my work previously....I just am not loud enough on the 'colour scene' 🙂 Anyway....I will put up my latest image (so you can get a feel for what I do) with hopefully more to follow as times goes on. This is NGC 7822. Anyone interested, can also look at past work on my web site www.KinchAstro.com. Kinch

I didn't replace the center of the widefield with the higher resolution - I did actually mix them. If I had replaced them you would have seen more of a difference I suspect. (Even the blend done on the PixInsight Forum - does not show such a marked difference as I think you were expecting - but then again, working with JPEGs will not do it for you). I know that you want a "method" rather than an example and I can point to one (via email) BUT it is in Photoshop rather than PixInsight.

just playing with the JPEGS......using PixelMath in PixInsight. I am not sure if it is as you expected but then again....it would depend on how much time you were willing to play with it. basically I aligned the two images with Dynamic Align and then added one with 1.25 times the higher resolution. The result shows quite a definite box of the smaller image within the big one.....so then I used Max function to blend the initial widefield in with the result to get rid of the 'box'. What I have done with the JPEGS tonight was just off the cuff - there are more likely better ways to do what you want - but I think, working with JPEG images your options are limited.

Yes - you are correct, that was my mistake because I also used the same extender with FSQ 130 and the FSQ 106. (There are several images on the website in 2016, using the FSQ106 & extender). But I know that you are not too concerned about looking at them because I used a smaller chipped camera. So, with my set-up, the extender works fine but as you say, one can see the problem in the corners of your images. I am not sure how you determined the actual metal back distance from the extender. You quoted your focal ratio as bein 8.02 and in truth I have no idea if that is significant in that it should be 8.00. From my side, I know that the metal back distance quoted as 117.5mm is correct on my set-up (taking into account the 1mm difference in the actual focus position caused by using Astrodon filters). You say you have it correct and I accept that. However, one of the big problems with the extender is that it is not a screw fitting and I really dislike how one has to attach it in the image train. Having said that, I have been OK with my results both with QSI & ATIK cameras. The only way, to know for sure re the image circle claim being correct or not is for someone else, with a larger chip camera, to add to the conversation. I hope we can have more contributors on this. Kinch