M42

[shifter]

Here's an image of M42 I took about a month ago (last time we had a decent night here) it was took on a friends scope with my dslr to see what differences there were between the scopes. His scope is a Tak (dunno what the spec is), the image is 12 images at iso 400, 120 secs, stacked with astroart.....Brian

[geppetto]

That's a very nice M42

Lots of detail and good shape to the stars

[barkis]

That is a very nice and neat production of M42 Shifter.

Ron.

[shifter]

Thanks for the comments I've just found two images of m42 taken with the 350d through the 10" lxd55, the first is 30 exposures of 30 secs iso 400 and the second is a colourised of the first. I think the colourised looks good but have it on good authority that although it looks nice, the colour is all wrong........We live and learn........Brian

[Kaptain Klevtsov]

The colour is wrong sez who?

Most of the Hubble images are false colour, so who's to say whats right and whats wrong?

In my hobby I do images that I like and colour them as I like. Noel Carboni has an excellent set of actions for Photoshop that do false colour and I use that for the Ha filtered stuff. Noel is at the very least in the top ten image processing guys out there, his images are top notch, and some are false colour.

You seem to be doing yourself down here, those are great images Brian, don't let anybody say otherwise.

What colour is M42 anyway? Is it the colour that I would see it through a huge 'scope? Or is it the colour that a DSLR would record or what? Colour is a very subjective thing, especially with DSOs as almost all processed images are stretched to get the most detail out of them, rather than maintain a colour balance.

Keep up the good work and don't let people put you off.

Astroman is a guy who hangs around here, I regard him as an extremely knowledgable contributer to this forum (he'll disagree because he's a modest guy). He has chided some of us for posting images "the wrong way up", but in a teasing, kind sort of way. His criticisms don't hurt as they are well meaning and informative at the same time.

I'm afraid Brian, that you should post more images here, firstly because I think that they are worth sharing, and secondly because I think that you deserve to be congratulated on the fine images that you have got.

Keep them coming so that we can comment on them and we'll all learn something in the process.

Captain Chaos

[Astroman]

Here's a link to an image by Chris Shur, an astrophotographer in Payson, AZ, in which he took great pains calibrating the colors in processing. He explains the whole thing on the site, and it is simply amazing.

http://www.schursastrophotography.com/xtiastro/sword021707.html

[dazza1639]

Great M42 images nice detail pin point stars

I really like them

Darren

[Astroman]

I posted Chris's image because he took great pains to represent true colors, as I said. Since we know the exact frequency at which electrons recombine with their respective nuclei, (the basis for the science of spectroscopy, and the physiological phenomenon of vision), Chris was able to calibrate the colors according to well known light characteristics. That said, CC is still correct in the "subjective" nature of image processing. Skilled individuals like Jack Newton, Bob Gendler or Damien Peach process images to make them as aesthetically pleasing as possible, some more than others. Scientific uses of identical images have a bare minimum of processing done in order to preserve the data present. (This is one reason I don't post a lot of images I've done-they're mostly boring, poorly tracked or focused images of random star fields, though still scientifically useful.) "False color" is used estensively to bring out specific features of interest, as CC also mentions. Chris's hope was to show M42 as it would appear if you were to travel to a few light minutes of it and have a view out the port hole. I'd say it's spectacular. But what most of us have to remember is that folks like Chris or Damien of Bob of Jack have been doing this for beers and beers, uh, years and years and really know what they're doing, BEFORE they commit the image to the net.

Thanks CC for your kind words. I just try to keep things factual to avoid misconceptions or confusion, and I'll keep doing it as long as you blokes will have me.

[shifter]

Hmm, you've certainly given me food for thought CC, and yes I will continue to send in images (with more details of conditions etc) The main thing I want to do is get the lxd guided so I can get longer exposures, I have a 70mm bresser on loan for this purpose and hoping the generic lxd55 mount will take it.....here's hoping...... Thanks for the link Astroman.....ya right it is amazing, I think I'm quite a long way from that sort of quality lol but its definatly something to aspire to but I gotta learn to walk before I can run and I want to get as much as I can out of the equpment I currently have before moving up to more expensive end of the market........Looks like I'll be out there tonight as the weather is looking favourable....wish someone could turn the moon down a bit hehehe .......Brian

[Astroman]

I think I'm quite a long way from that sort of quality lol but its definatly something to aspire to but I gotta learn to walk before I can run and I want to get as much as I can out of the equpment I currently have before moving up to more expensive end of the market....

>Hands on hips, superhero voice< Well then, my work here is done!