Rustang

35 minutes ago, Ags said:

Gorgeous!

Cheers 👍

6 minutes ago, simmo39 said:

V nice indeed!

Thanks

Ive been meaning to look into this for ages just to confirm if it is what it is or if I'm missing something. Its in regards to the contrast of nebulosity against the dark sky in my data as Ive always felt its a little to grey across the board. It could just be that that's what my equipment produces so I'm just looking to check if that's the case or not as I normally see alot more contrast in pretty much everyone else's data.

Its a QHY9 mono CCD camera that I'm using with baader NB filters so first I want to check if the issue is down to the sensitivity of this particular camera!? I capture at - 20, gain 9 offset 109. Adam (the cameras previous owner) kindly helped me with what settings to use etc and I've been taking 10 min exposures after discussing this with him. I wanted to double check if in my bortle 6 skies whether or not 10min subs could just be to long and washing things out a little?

Processing - I appreciate that it could be down to simply the processing of the data but I'm not necessarily convinced by this, I have an example below of some stacked Ha data with some basic levels/curves adjustment and its pretty grey across the board still. At this stage I have to really start working hard to get a decent dark sky (not black) behind the nebulosity and that's been the case since owning the camera. I only purchased the camera back in February this year so still pretty new to narrowband imaging so have stayed in the comfort zone of what settings to use, I wouldn't really know where to start if I was going to change anything!

I'm not necessarily bothered and Ive been really pleased with the images Ive been getting with the camera but if there is anyway of helping things along I'm all ears!

I had packed my stuff up with the intention of waiting for some darker skies to come again but then discovered this nebula online and the rest is history! I really went around and around with the processing on this one, mainly because it was difficult data to deal with but I'm pleased with the results considering. Ive attached a couple of versions, first the colour palette that I prefer and the second more towards a normal HOO palette which I'm not normally keen on but I kinda like it on this target.

Captured over 5 nights, Ha= 7hrs, OIII= 5hrs 20mins.

Scope - SW80 ED DS PRO

Mount - SW HEQ5 PRO

Camera - QHY9 CCD Mono

Software - APT, PHD2, DSS, PS.

Thanks guys

So its one of those "I'm bored" days today so I reprocessed my HaRGB Soul nebula data

4 hours ago, Budgie1 said:

I thought you were "Mono Man" now? 🤣

I'am but one day I'm going to be greedy and have both 😁

Il be watching this with interest as I've recently started gaining some interest in this camera myself, I also have an SW 80 ED DS Pro  

I was going to stop for a few weeks but couldn't help myself after discovering a new target so Ive been gathering some noisy data on that for a couple of nights! 😁

Stunning, beautiful colours 👏👏

2 minutes ago, geeklee said:

Looks lovely @Rustang Any noise is well hidden in this sized image - the colours look superb.

Agreed.  It's good to see both versions sometimes.  

Thanks mate

Sorry Star lovers but I think this looks beautiful!

16 minutes ago, Adreneline said:

Despite all your worries and reservations that's turned out really well.

Thanks for sharing.

Adrian

Thanks, yeah it has surprised me how well its gone

Well it had been a month and I was itching to do some astrophotography so despite the not so dark sky's, moon light, clouds, lack of sleep, noisy data, lack of data! I did it anyway! 😁

I wasnt holding much if any hopes on the data, especially the OIII because that took some pushing to get the little amount that I managed for this image but despite the noise, I am however pleased with the result.

Taken over 4 recent nights, Ha 5hrs 10 min, OIII 5hrs 20mins

SW80 ED DS PRO scope, HEQ5 Pro mount

QHY 9 mono with Baader NB filters

Stacked in DSS and processed in PS.

40 minutes ago, Adreneline said:

Well I guess you won't know until you give it a go. My experience with OIII has not been good unless it is very dark and clear - i.e. no Moon and very good seeing. I've found that although I can get something to start to produce a HOO or H(HO)O image the noise from the OIII can really spoil excellent Ha data. SII is better but not a lot of use to combine with Ha unless you have OIII as well.

Good luck - I look forward to seeing how you get on.

 

Thanks, Ive had to learn some very useful processing techniques for some not so great OIII/SII data and that's been getting me by. I dont have the strongest of NB filters either but will up grade one day, really enjoying the learning curve of NB imaging though.

19 minutes ago, Adreneline said:

I tried OIII once I'd taken 20 frames of Ha. Just one frame convinced me I was wasting my time with no astro darkness; OIII will have to wait a few weeks I think.

When I went to longer than 180s in my previous location all that happened was the background levels came up and there was no perceptible improvement in detail from the target. With my CCD (Atik428ex - now sold) I was able to push it up to 300s and even 600s and there was an improvement in depth but at the expense of more wasted frames from low flying aircraft which would literally obliterate pretty much everything in the fov. Some nights the planes were landing 2 minutes apart so a 10 minute sub would be a total write-off.

Adrian

 

Mines a QHY 9 mono, I think it needs to be pushed to 600 -1200 sec subs from memory and its been working ok but saving time and adding more subs might give a different result, not sure as I'm still learning!. I probably am wasting my time trying to get some OIII but also trying to make the most of what ever imaging I can get, 3hrs worth has produced a very faint amount but stretched to the max, I might try and get a few more hours then just see how it goes.  

51 minutes ago, Adreneline said:

Hi.

Thank you.

Habit is probably the honest answer.

I used to live in a Bortle 5/6 area and going beyond 180s offered no benefit. Haing moved to a Bortle 2/3 area I'm still using 180s (and sometimes 120s and 60s) simply because I have Master Dark frames to match. I also used to live under the flight path for a fairly busy airport (EMA) and when I used 300s or even 600s with my previous CCD far too many frames were wrecked by passing aircraft coming into land - the discard rate with 180s was far less.

I suppose I should try experimenting in this location with (a) longer exposures and (b) changing the gain when the astro dark skies return.

Have to say I am pretty happy with the depth I get using 180s, gain 139, offest 50 and -20 degrees but I really should experiment more I guess.

Adrian  

I see, It certainly seems to work well with 180 sec's  I would love to come away from 600 subs, it feels like such a long time. I'm also bortle 5/6, I'm wondering if I could get away with 180 sec with my older CCD, I'm not sure how to tell though unless its simply a case of do you get the same level of detail!? I guess there are also factors like sensitivity of the sensor and other tech stuff that plays apart too!? I'm also on this target, trying to get any OIII is like trying to flog a dead horse though! 😕

Very nice   I'm interested to know why you have only taken short subs at 180 sec's !? 

Beautiful 

Amazing, well done 👏👏

Beautiful 

Very nice, I recon with a little use of the clone tool in Photoshop you could just clean up those star removal remnant's in bottom left corner but lovely though 👍 I have also just started using Starnet as part of my processing and its a great piece of software and proving to be really useful.

Very nice 👍

2 minutes ago, geeklee said:

😅 All I see is a great image but with loads more detail I can enjoy👍 

I'll let the creator "enjoy" any flaws - I do it enough on my own images, I'm certainly not looking for it elsewhere! 😅

Thanks 🙂  I'm terrible, way to critical but once in a while it calms down and I enjoy my work again! I guess it helps strive for a better image.

2 minutes ago, geeklee said:

It has, I've opened that in a new tab and done the typical browser "click to zoom" (cursor turns to a magnifying glass with a plus sign) function and am now enjoying the 1:1 version - thanks  it looks great 👍

Don't look to close! you will see its many flaws! Best viewed from a far!  😉