gorann

Before you make it too complicated, have you tried by starting off by just processing it as an RGB image? If you think red is too dominant you can then work of the color curves separately in PS (in curves where you select one colour channel at at time), for example suppressing red and bringing up blue. Some object of course have almost all the emission in red except for the stars but for the Soul Nebula there will be quite a lot of blue signal. This is what it looked like for me (RASA 8 and ASI2600MC with NBX filter). Only 60 min data so quite noisy. Processed as an RGB image in PS.

Both look great Olly and thanks for giving the detailed work flow. Most of it similar to what I would have done but one thing was new to me: I never tried PS Despeckle. I tried it now on a different image and got the feeling it was maily a light Gaussian blur, but maybe not. What is the advantage of it in your view compared to other NRs?

Thanks a lot!

Hi Olly, I use CS5 and have the same settings as you. I notice that in both your CS3 and my CS5 there is also a button for "More Options" that seems to be already shown in the new PS (as I see from your post). I wonder if something may be different there and those settings. This is what it looks like in CS5 when I press "More Options". There are some RGB settings there: Cheers, Göran

There could of course be individual differences related to quality control. I recently bought a second RASA 8 and ASI2600MC with the aim of setting up a dual rig. I could be in for a surprise......

Thanks Robert! Yes, getting distances right is the major problem, especially since I move between using an NBX filter (when the moon is out) and no filter for RGB. I often have to accept some long stars in the corners and deal with them in processing. Takes an extra half hour. Using an APS-C camera is really a bit past the limits of this scope so I cannot complain. What has surprised me is how easy it is to focus and how well it keeps focus not only during the night but from night to night. Celestron really got the mirror holding sorted out in this scope.

Ha ha, thanks a lot!

I am using an IDAS NBX Oiii&Ha filter with my ASI2600MC. I think that filter is similar to your L-eNhance. I usually just process it as a regular RGB image (mainly in PS) and do not process the channels separately. I find i quite easy that way. Separating the channels will probably risk messing up star colours. You can allways colour balance it by using curves on the separate colours. Here is a recent example from my images (taken with a RASA 8, details on my Astrobin page):

Looks really good - very nice detail and even background sky. One to be proud of! I would maybe turn up the top of the red curve a littel bit as it looks, from my memory, a bit whitish for being the Markarian's chain. Check some other images of it.

That is a great image Rodd, nice detail and I especially like the second version with more neutral (not all cyan) star colours. It reminds me when I one processed Thor data that there is a lot of Ha there, really a lot, that surrounds the Oiii. I once maybe got over the top to prove it: https://www.astrobin.com/385247/C/

Thanks a lot Adam!

Thanks a lot!

Thanks a lot Ian! Same here right now🥴

Thanks a lot!

Thanks Adrian! Only very few images seem to exist of this one.

Maybe. Found this image on the net from a talk given by Mandel:

PS. You just made me look up Arp's loop and apparently it is probably not associated with M81 (as suggested by Arp) but IFN, which is rather clear in my image. https://www.cosmotography.com/images/small_ngc3031.htm

Thanks! Framing was a bit of planning and a lot of luck.

Thanks a lot Dave! I am actually quite happy with it, especially since it will be the last one for a while. Now clouds have settled and 20 cm of snow is promised here soon - spring is on a halt.

The Volcano Nebula is Nr 3 in the Mandel-Wilson Catalogue of Integrated Flux Nebulae (IFN). IFN is a very faint type of nebulosity that is thought to be diffusely and collectively energized by all the stars in the galaxy rather than a single star (like in reflection nebulae). It is therefore very faint and is best imaged with a rather large parture short focal lenght telescope (i.e. with a low f-value), like the RASA 8, and a relaively long total integration time. Then a dark site is also needed. My SQM showed 21.4 on this night and the lack of major mishaps and clouds allowed me to collect 8.3 hours. To the right part of the image (containing M81 and M82) I added an additional 4.7 hours that I collected with the same set-up in February. I actually did not need to stretch the data so far that I run into any major noise problems and I have only done a gentle HiPass filtering to improve the contrast a bit. So there is more to bring out but I fear it may make it look messy and I kind of like it the way it is (at least right now). A little detail I like is that blue bubble that appears to surround M82. I first feared it may be an artifact but searching the web I found it on other deep images of M82. Data gathered the night 7-8 March with the RASA 8 (f/2) and ASI2600MC (no filter, gain 100, -15°C). 125 x 4 min. The February data added was 71 x 4 min. So totally 13.1 hours - so far my record with the RASA 8😀.

Nice, but maybe a bit too much magenta-violet in the sky now? I liked the colour a bit better in the first version.

If I should make a suggestion after looking at the wide field version again, it would be to crop the left a bit to get rid of that bright star with chromatic abberation. Not much interesting to lose on that edge anyhow.

Yes, a very pleasing image Martin!. Sharp and with a great palette where you steared nicely away from the green.

Looks very good indeed, and excellent processing, well worth the effort!

Oh, that is simply what I got. First night I got 4.4 hours before clouds moved in and I processed what I had and it looked rather ok but I thought it could look even better with a bit less noise so I gave it another night. Then clouds moved in last night even earlier so I only got an extra 19 subs but decided it was enough for my attempt on this target. Simply it looked good enough by my humble standards.