M106 (fourteenth night)

[MikeWilson]

Isn't all this beautiful weather we're having really wonderful?

As I left my telescope out all night (under an Ikea bag - I need a proper strong weatherproof cover), I was able to get going with a minimum of setup time tonight.

I picked M106 as a target as relative humidity was again high and the moon was rising to the east and I didn't want a washout.

I collected 3 hours worth of data, but only used 1 hour and 50 minutes (of 5 minute lights) - my longest integration time yet. I re-used the darks from last night's M44 image (http://stargazerslounge.com/imaging-deep-sky/139408-m44-beehive-cluster-thirteenth-night.html) as the temperatures were about the same. Half of my data was taken before a meridian flip. The flip cost me about 30 minutes as I had to re-sync, re-align and re-compose the frame I also forgot to adjust the weight balance so I lost a bunch of frames to backlash(?) errors. Bah.

I still have annoying blotchy background noise that neither PixInsight LE's DBE feature, nor Noel's actions can deal with. I presume that I'm just stretching the data too far?

Original stacked .tiff (in case anyone wants to have a go ): http://dl.dropbox.com/u/3717210/M106%20%2824-04-2011%29%201hr50min%20in%205%20min%20subs.TIF

I hope that you like my M106, I couldn't believe after framing it that there was a satellite galaxy and a small star cluster in the same frame. In fact, if I look closely I think I can see several other galaxies. Mindblowing stuff, particularly if (like me) you're approaching this as a learning and discovery exercise. This M106 image was the first M106 image I've ever seen (looking at someone elses' image first seemed to me a little like a movie spoiler - I love the joy of "discovery")

Clear skies to you,

Mike

[AndyUK]

Nice capture again Mike - I love the little friend on the right...!

(I don't know about you, but I'm really struggling with the noise now - I think my DSLR will be taking a rest for a while from the longer exposures...)

[peter shah]

very nicely done:cool:

[MikeWilson]

Hi Peter and Andy,

Thanks for your comments. I really do like this image, despite the seeing and noise issues. There are so many galaxies in there - it's a thrilling challenge of pulling them all out (I'd enjoy visual if it were possible to see anything - M13 through the eyepiece is all but invisible at my location whereas at Kelling Heath I almost thought it was a practical joke when Ant showed it to me through my own telescope!).

The noise is getting to be a big, big problem. At best without cooling on the longer (5 min) exposures you need to stretch so much that the images become almost "stylised".

Anyhow, for those lurking - THIS is the difference between a dark taken from this session and a fridge dark, as used in my earlier images. Both 5 minutes at ISO 800 with the same stretch applied. Check out those Histograms (the black graphs - the entire covered area is unwanted noise)!

A dark file used in this image (EXIF @ 22c).

A dark file used in winter images (EXIF @5c).

A 100% crop of the right hand satellite galaxy with no stretch after dark subtraction

[AndyUK]

Very interesting comparison Mike. If i stare at the top one long enough I can see a fish - I wonder what a psychiatrist would make of that...?

I'm coming to the conclusion that in order to start leaving the noise behind with a DSLR it's going to need 6+ hrs or more on a faint fuzzy... or it could just be my clumsy processing...!

[MikeWilson]

Very interesting comparison Mike. If i stare at the top one long enough I can see a fish - I wonder what a psychiatrist would make of that...?

I'm coming to the conclusion that in order to start leaving the noise behind with a DSLR it's going to need 6+ hrs or more on a faint fuzzy... or it could just be my clumsy processing...!

What kind of fish was it? This might give us an idea as to what you were thinking about at the time :-)

RE: DSLR, I would say it all depends on what faint fuzzy you're after and the noise doesn't go away when you're imaging a star cluster either as I found out on the previous night.

DSLR's are amazing but this has to be the biggest drawback, fortunately it's only a real pain in the *** on the warmer nights and with a lot of temperature matched darks you can work wonders!

Best,

Mike

[AndyUK]

(It was an ugly looking thing - sort of like a Coelecanth... I think it's probably my subconscious telling me I must clean the fish tanks today!)

[jgs001]

Nice results Mike... interesting on the noise too.

[Ant]

I like that image Mike. I've never had any luck with Galaxies, which I'm putting down to my location (I have to image in NB).

I can see at least a couple of other smaller galaxies... It's amazing whats there when you really look!

Great image.

Ant

[Yoddha]

Great image Mike! I tried to process the TIFF but didn't get better result than yours...

[Deneb]

Could you upload the whole stack to dropbox inc. the flats, darks & bias please...

Nadeem.

[dc509]

Very nice image - loads of little fuzzies in there.

d

[MikeWilson]

@AndyUK - That's not an ugly fish. This is an ugly fish! http://dsc.discovery.com/sharks/shark-types/goblin-shark.jpg

@jgs001- Thanks! I can really see the advantage of cooling the chip now.

@ant - Have you tried RGB? I use the Astronomik CLS-CCD filter and it does a remarkable job on the light pollution. 30 seconds without it goes to almost saturated orange, but I can do at least five minutes with it. That's rather incredible.

Yoddha - Thanks for trying

Deneb - In about an hour from now (18:30 or so) it should be ready here: http://dl.dropbox.com/u/3717210/M106%20for%20Nadeem.rar

dc509 - Incredible, isn't it? Astrometry shows four, but I can see a couple more. I'm going to take a look in Stellarium to see what they're catalogue names and magnitudes are.

Clear skies,

Mike

[MikeWilson]

Alright Nadeem, it's all there :-) thanks in advance for your expertise!

Kind Regards,

Mike