Rodd

I added 3 hours of Ha collected during good seeing with the TOA 130 to the Crescent nebula image captured using the C11Edge.  I can't seem to achieve a background that appeals to me.  I have a million versions on Astrobin and I still cant decide which is best.  I've kept it Bin1, but also like Bin 2 as it is not too large.  

Its nice to see a galaxy image that is not a neon blaze.  Just about a perfect image.  

22 minutes ago, simmo39 said:

V nice!

Thanks! I tend to forget how much satisfaction there is in imaging in decent seeing.  

I added 2 hours for a running total of 3.  I certainly have not reached the point of diminishing returns yet - at least not with this data.  The soap bubble at lower left is starting to materialize.

This is about 1/2 the red channel and a solid 17 hour of Ha.  The distinct dots near the core are in the Ha channel and not the red channel-so they are not stars I don't think, but Ha features, which surprised me.  I was trapped in a bright Moon with no real decent Ha targets for a 5" scope, at least until 2:00 when the Crescent Nebula becomes available.  I came across this galaxy, which is somewhat faint and not imaged all that often.  I was surprised to learn that it has distinct, Ha.  I think it will make an interesting image becuase there is not a well defined core - at least not at this focal length, but the Ha, if enough is collected, stands out fairly well.  Really looking forward to seeing this one with color.  As is typical for me, I will need 4-5 hours each of RGB and a solid luminance.  Since the target is approaching the meridian, inclement weather and clouds could threaten to derail this project for the year.

TOA 130 with ASI 1600. about 17 hours of Ha and 2 hours of red.

This is a mystery to me.  This image has 1 hour of data (12 300 sec Ha).  I don't understand  why it looks so nice.  Generally, I need copious data to avoid a  stippley  background. But not so in this case. Conditions were not great, as is common, and the Moon was about 75%.      I botched the framing somewhat, as I wanted the soap bubble and the Crescent to be displayed. The soap bubble can just be seen near lower left margin.  
TOA 130 with ASI 1600. 1 hour Ha.

I recently posted an FSQ crop version of this nebula. I think the fsq is better for the whole view, but full resolution for this version is way better. The other thing I notice is the color of the narrow band stars is reminiscent of rgb in a way.  I usually replace them with Ha stars in SHO images, but the color here appeals to me. The blue ones might be a tad to OIIIish, but that can be corrected.  
TOA 130 and asi 1600. About 34 hours

1 hour ago, gorann said:

Really nice! Getting that blue out in this object is a challenge! Using Ha as Lum, as suggested, is usually a bad idea and as you say it turns everything salmon coloured, In this case it would really suppress your blue signal.

Thanks, Goran.  The lightness channel of the SHO image worked well--and I used an extracted blue channel as a mask to protect the reflection nebula, so it wouldn't be diluted.  I was pleasantly surprised.

1 hour ago, ollypenrice said:

Very good separation of the reflection nebulosity.

Olly

Thanks, Olly. I really need more blue, but time slipped away. Lately (for the last 6 months) I have been averaging about a day/month. It’s terminally overcast. 

58 minutes ago, symmetal said:

Yes, it certainly makes a difference. Impressive result. Have you tried just adding the Ha as the L channel. It should be less noisy than the SHO derived L, although it doesn't appear to have added noise to your image. The Oiii in your L may have improved the detail in the Blue structures, so maybe you made the right choice. 🙂

Alan

Yes. The first thing I tried was adding the Ha. It adds detail, but It turns the image light pink.  That tends to happen when you use Ha as a luminance (or lightness).  I guess I could have added it to the red channel like typically done. Maybe I should try that AND what I did. 

Sometimes it pays to be creative. In this image, I added a lightness channel (luminance) from a SHO image to an RGB image.  The RGB has about 9 hours of data.  It was just an experiment. I think it was pretty convincingly a success.

”L”RGB

Original RGB

8 minutes ago, juno16 said:

That is a beautiful repro Rodd.

Great color and spectacular detail !

Thanks Juno

2 minutes ago, Adreneline said:

A definite improvement at 1:1. More natural colour, more depth and structure revealed. Previous image looked over-sharpened to my eyes but then it is all quite subjective. Worth a re-visit for sure.

Thanks!  Yes, thgose were my thoughts as well.

I seem to live by the adage "throw it in a drawer for awhile and come bac to it."  Sometimes I prefer thd original, a sign that further gains are unlikley, and sometimes the improvement is obvious.

TOA 130 and ASI 1600, HaLRGB, about 24.25 hours

New Image

Former version

16 hours ago, Rodd said:

Thanks, glad you like it

Thanks. Glad you like it!

1 hour ago, ollypenrice said:

Yes, lovely. I'm going to see if I can find my old linear TEC140 data and see what difference modern processing tools make. 

Olly

They probably won’t fully compensate for the difference in sky quality.  The difference I see in data quality between a poor night and an average night is huge. I can’t imagine how much better a decent night under good skies would be.  Well, I can imagine (sometimes a good imagination is a bane). 

2 hours ago, ollypenrice said:

For me, this image didn't seem exceptional until I clicked for the largest size - and then I found that the central bulge and dust lane were absolutely stunning. Unfortunately the last one seems to have been posted at lower resolution, or am I giving it the wrong clicks? It needs to be seen in large format to show its class.

What I do think is that the fainter outer regions are noisy, with a pronounced grain. I'm sure Russ Croman's Noise Xterminator would fix that easily and might allow you to give the lower brightnesses a bit more of a stretch. I wouldn't apply it to the brighter parts or dust lane. Those are superb.

Olly

Thanks Olly. You hit upon a couple of the plethora of problems with this image-hence my frustrated post. Here is the final version of this image. better?

4 hours ago, Saganite said:

Super image, just beautiful...

Thanks

5 hours ago, ollypenrice said:

Very hard for imagers to capture the globular sparkle but you have it for sure. Great image.

Olly

Thanks Olly. Could use a bit more time for the faint outer regions

7 hours ago, Owmuchonomy said:

That's really nice.

 

Thanks, glad you like it

7 hours ago, paul mc c said:

What was your individual sub length..... cracking image.

Thanks. 300 sec, which is very unusual for me for broadband

After years I finally got it.  
toa 130 about 10 hours

1 hour ago, assouptro said:

Rodd 

we are our own worst critics 

Throw your mind back to when you were starting out in this crazy hobby 

Im sure you would have been over the moon with the first 2! 
 

I have to admit, I have only viewed your images on my phone so far due to time constraints but they all look great to me! 
 

I hope you are ok Rodd? I enjoy your images as the ones that I’ve noticed are normally taken at longer focal lengths or cropped to achieve the same effect, and I too enjoy imagining “close up and personal” to some of the deep sky objects up there although you have superior optics

Take care 

Bryan 

 

Thanks Bryan....I am fine, ust get frustrated at times.  I have come to teh conclusion that 99% of the frustration comes from the conditions, whether it be haze, high cloud, jet stream, smoke, LP, wind, humidity, the Moon, you name it, it's there most of the time.   The images that give me the biggest headaches are the ones taken during poor conditions.  I am starting to come to terms with this being a part time hobby.  I think from now on I have to accept that I will need, on average, two Moon cycles to finish an image.  Two nights with each filter.  Thats 10 imaging sessions for an HaLRGB galaxy.  If I want to use only subs taken during good seeing, I will need to kake it 3-4 Moon cycles. Man, if I am not careful, I will start to lose interest! 

I decided to crop it like I did originally.  The idea is to provide some size still less than that of full resolution, so the viewer doesnt have to "work" as hard.

32 minutes ago, glafnazur said:

The full resolution image is great 👍

Thabnks-glad you like it