HunterHarling

I added Ha to my previous M33 image and reprocessed. I'm quite happy with the improvement so far:

RGBL: 50x300s each

Ha: 25x400s

Asi1600mm

FSQ106

Thanks for looking, questions comments always welcome!

Beautify processed image! I really like the star field.

1 hour ago, sharkmelley said:

I've never seen the Cocoon so deep!  Fabulous image!  Helped by the fast optics of the Tak Epsilon of course 😉

Mark

 

I believe that this image is a bit deeper...

This image is still a WIP as I want to add Ha data. I'm pleased with the result so far though, this is really a great target. One thing I found really interesting is that there are several green nebulae in m33 which I am used to seeing as red. Does anyone know why this is? It looks like OIII.

And here are some of the OIII nebulae:

L: 60x300s

RGB: 50x300s each

ASI 1600

FSQ106

Thanks for looking  

This was a shot from Joshua Tree NP taken 7 July 2019. This is 4 stacked 30s images taken with a Nikon d810a, nikkor 14-24mm and processed in Pixinsight and PS. one image was used for the foreground. The brightness on the right side of the image is from the moon.

Thanks for looking  

It is out of focus a bit, do you use a Bahtinov mask? It looks like regular SCT coma. If so, there isn't much you can do about it, aside from get a high quality reducer like the one Starizona makes.

Posting a full image might help diagnose the issue.

These images do look like they have a lot of noise🤔 I would add many more exposures and see if it gets better.

For noise reduction in Pixinsight, I found it best to use three separate processes all with a grayscale range mask.

First, TGV denoise with a local support image.

Second, multiscale median transformation at 8 different scales and amounts.

Third, ADCNR after stretching the image if it still requires nose reduction.

However, if you feel the data is a bit thin or has too much noise, just get more exposure. The more you add, the easier it will be to process.

30 minutes ago, tooth_dr said:

Stunning image. Inspired me to give it a go tonight. A stretched 10 min sub and I could just about see (I think) part of a faint outline of the Oiii envelope.  I’m guessing it’s pretty faint, as you said 11 hours and it was still difficult!

It's definitely worth imaging though, such a great target. I look forward to seeing your image.

15 hours ago, hennyvenom said:

As someone who is looking into getting a ASI 1600 with the filters, this image is stunning, and also encouraging 👍

Thanks! The camera is amazing, especially for such a great price. The filters aren't so great, however. If I could I would get maybe Baader or Astronomic instead.

14 hours ago, carastro said:

What a stunning and beautiful and nicely processed image.

Carole 

Thanks so much, Carole.

3 hours ago, artem said:

excellent Image !!

Thanks.

23 hours ago, ollypenrice said:

Nice image with a lovely bold bubble! I'm surprised that you found the OIII shell difficult and it does look slightly thin, though very good. It's given me good signal in the past with Baader filters (though these do give haloes.)

Olly

I believe that narrower bandwidth OIII might help... I did capture during a full moon so there were some background gradients.

Here is a crop of NGC 6888 and the bubble:

6 hours ago, ollypenrice said:

This surely can't be a good way to do it, though, because all the colour subs will be weighted at the same value as the luminance subs. They are very defective in signal compared with the L subs and they are more numerous, so their defective signal will outweigh the L signal where that is better.

I'd be more inclined to put all the R,G and B subs into a stack and make a greyscale output image called Synthetic Luminance. I think PI can read the noise level in this stack and the L stack and combine them at an appropriate weighting. Alternatively you could give the Synth Lum and the real Lum equivalent stretches (not stretching them right to the limit but till the backgrounds were the same.) Then paste one on top of the other in Ps and play the opacity slider till you got the lowest level of noise by looking into the image at a high zoom factor.

Olly

Yes, this would probably work better. I might try this with some of my older data.

I found it is best to throw all the R, G, B, and L subs together in a stack. There is the same amount of signal as L and a bit less noise.

11 hours ago, alan potts said:

Judging by you fine results your not doing much wrong

Alan

I am going to experiment more with exposure length though...

4 hours ago, carastro said:

placed the Oiii image over a copy of the Ha image and rubbed out the Oiii star and Halo and flattened giving an Oiii image without the halos.

This seems like it will work... I'll give it a try.

2 hours ago, ollypenrice said:

My Baader OIIIs have had haloes (like my Astronomiks) but the Ha filters have always been fine. (In several examples.)

Same with me. At least for my ZWO set, the OIII is always the one to give halos.

11 minutes ago, GiorgioF said:

Wow..... Both to much for me. I'm under a 8 or 9.... In this case I understand a so long exposure. Did you also try shorter sub and a lot more?

Yes, I've imaged using 180s before with good results. Really though, if you have bad light pollution, you should do narrowband. You could get some great results even with extreme LP.

34 minutes ago, alan potts said:

Another beautiful image from you, have to ask, any reason why 400secs, is it just easy to remember? I tend to work in minutes, but then what do I know.

Alan

Thanks, Alan. Well, I started with 300 second for narrow band, but there wasn't enough signal. Then, I went to 600s and there was too much amp glow, so I settled on sort of a middle-ground at 400s which seem to give good results   

I may be adding RGB stars to this image, but I'm satisfied I finally captured the Soap Bubble after seeing some great images of it.

This is 17 hours of Ha and OIII in HOO palette. It was difficult to bring out the OIII halo, even with the 11 hours of OIII data...

Ha: 55x400s

OIII: 100x400s

ASI1600mm

FSQ106 ED

ZWO Ha, OIII filters

Thanks for looking and question/ comments welcome

3 hours ago, GiorgioF said:

Excellent colours and processing. What was the Bortle sky? 300" on RGB is a huge amount (for me) with the asi1600.

 

Thanks. My bortal sky is much worse on the south-west side than the north-east, so I believe the sky around Cepheus is about Bortal 4. However, looking south-west is probably Bortal 6 or worse I think I'm pretty lucky to have the better northern sky though, as I can capture the targets as they rise   

6 hours ago, gorann said:

Very nice! I agree with Wim, you probably need better filters or live with the halos. It could be that Baader filters could be good enough, especially their new narrower ones. Good thing with the ASI1600 is that you could probably use 1.25" filters.

Yes, fortunately I can use 1.25" filters😂 Would be very expensive if I needed 2 inch, even for brands other than Astrodon. Amazing how much a small circle of glass costs...

Thanks, Daniel and Wim. I tried cloning the halos, but it didn't turn out too well. 

6 hours ago, wimvb said:

a Tak deserves more than cheap zwo filters

I think you're right:) I'm really considering Astrodon, but if I go Astrodon I can't get the full set due to cost. Astronomic filters also look great though.

Hi all, here is about 27 hours of Ha and Oiii data of NGC 7000. This is the largest deep sky panorama I've done yet, and was hard to put together in Pixinsight. Also, my ZWO filters are giving me halo problems, advise about removing the halos would be appreciated...

ASI 1600mm

FSQ106 ED

Ha: 25x400s per panel

OIII: 35x400s per panel

Total~26.7 hours

Thanks for looking

On 14/08/2019 at 15:28, Tom OD said:

Excellent pic. Nicely processed.

Tom

Thanks, Tom!

I've never seen an image this deep of the Saturn nebula. Amazing...

12 minutes ago, alan potts said:

A beautiful image and one I can't recall seeing before, not as good anyway. Thanks for posting.

Alan

Thanks, Alan!

2 hours ago, astro mick said:

This is a cracking image,i don't know how this has been missed.

Well done.

Mick.

Thanks, Mick:)