First DSO M42 ....

[obscura]

.... well, not exactly. M31 was really the first but needs a longer exposure but that's for next year. This Orion image was bulit from :-

30 subs at 10s, 30 at 60s and 15 at 180s plus 15 each of darks, flats, bias and flats for each exposure. Once stacked in DSS to get 3 masters at each exposure they were run through PS to get this image. Stretched to give me 5 and cobbled together. I think the 180s is stretched a little too far. The 10s exposure wasn't much use tho' the Trapezium was easily seen. Its apparent to me that I would have been better to do exposures at 60, 180, 300. But I am my own worst critic. Critique welcomed.

Equipment as below + Baader UHC-S L Booster filter.

[Tim]

Ah, I remember that feeling very well the first time M42 rolled off my camera, I nearly laid an egg!

You have some good detail here, perfect framing, and a good balance of exposure lengths so that nothing is missed.

The image is a little heavy on the red side, and a little dark in the background, be careful not to clip the black or white ends of the histogram.

You might also like to try stacking ALL of the images together in DSS, using the HDR stacking setting. This can give you a single image to work with that contains all the data.

At any rate, what a great start, let's hope you can produce some more over the winter.

Clear skies!

Tim

[spaceboy]

WOW that's a great first M42!!

[ollypenrice]

The fact that this is a popular target tends to dusguise the fact that it is one of the hardest. I agree with the advice above. I also think it is very red. Look at the histogram for each colour and try to get the top left of the peak aligned in each. This means starting again from an early stretch because the 'room to manoeuvre' comes only from clipping back the noise on the bottom left of the histogram.

I think you took the right sub lengths but did not find the best way of combining them. The method I use is described very well here; Compositing 2 Different Exposures via Layer Masks

On another matter, if I'm not mistaken you sent me a PM a good while back and when I tried to respond I got the message that you'd elected not to receive PMs. If my memory is playing me false I apologize but I do reply to PMs as assiduously as I can.

Olly

[obscura]

Many thanks for your input. When the first image rolled down, I looked at it in awe and just sat back and stared at it. Breathtaking.

Agreed, its too red. I will take advice on board. I used layer masks on the 60s and 180s but not the 10s. This was a first 'high' speed post processing to see a result as a big kid would. I was thinking of doing some 300s but I think I'll use the rare clear night for Flame, Horsehead etc (tho' a neighbour has decided to keep his flashing Christmas lights on all night.)

I don't recall sending a PM Olly but I'll check. I have received a few PMs so that should be OK.

Again thanks for the advice above.

[obscura]

Hi again.

Firstly, Olly, I don't think it was me - none of my PMs sent to you - but then I wouldn't send unsolicited PMs unless agreed. I recall we agreed on "Universe" some while back.

Secondly. Re processed my 60s and 180s as shown with Jerry's procedure. Very good except I don't seem to have VIEW, NEW VIEW in my PS - so had to run without the composite on screen. There must be an equivalent but couldn't find it. (Have it on my old original PS5.5)

The new image is certainly different and smoother and much less garish.

Please critique.

Do you have any input on Jerry's book A Guide to Astrophotography?

[samir_ansari]

That really is a stonking first attempt at a DSO. I'm far too ashamed to even think about posting my first attempt which was taken *handheld* with a 200mm zoom lens!

Keep it up and you'll have a wallet as slim as the rest of us on this board

[obscura]

I joined here about the same time as you and these guys put me on the straight and narrow and saved me getting the wrong kit and saving me a fortune in the process. I did take an odd star field with a 200mm on my Canon way back in March but that didn't count as a real DSO was in my mind. The other factor was a DSO image that was to my satisfaction. The M31 got close but not enough exposure. Thus this shot here is 11 months on with reading, researching and DIY efforts.

Can't have a thinner wallet - wife won't let me either. But I'm happy with what I have but could drool over a real CCD imager. The Lottery isn't much help either. C'est la vie.

(Kit is out there right now awaiting the Flame and Horsehead for 10pm tonight)

Cheers

[Shibby]

Oldgit, fantastic first DSO! I won't show you mine to save major embarrassment!

The second version is vastly improved (there's so much to learn when it comes to processing!) However, I think the colour balance is still a little off. Hope you don't mind, but I've just done a very quick level adjustment in Gimp to demonstrate:

[obscura]

Not at all. My pleasure. That is nice! Do you mean colour balance levels or straight level/curves? I kept things down on my second go to pick out the Trapezium. I'll spend more time and play to see what happens. The other thing at the back of my mind was "what does it really look like?"

In any event, and I am no sentimentalist, it really is a beautiful thing.

[rocketandroll]

That's a stunning first attempt... worthy of a seasoned pro :-)

I think many of us have had that same first experience seeing the first sub of M42 roll in and having some kind of invouluntary bodily function as a result ;-)

Colour wise the second version and even more so Shibby's version are looking about right. I tend to take an 'average' of the colours I see in any DSO from as many other people's images as I can... M42 has some areas (the foreground dust) which often have a grey, violet-ish tinge and the background nebulosity often appears more magenta, reddish.

Lovely either way... very crisp and lots of detail. Don't be too dissapointed by what you get from the Horsehead/Flame... they are about 1/10th as bright as M42 :-)

Ben

[obscura]

Hi Ben. Thanks for the advice. Will play with exposures for an optimum. Hopefully. You may see them on these pages ........

[Tim]

The second rendition is a big improvement, still a bit pinky perhaps, a boost to the blue might bring it round.

Cheers

Tim

[ollypenrice]

Sorry about the PM error. Must've been someone else!

Re the Lodigruss technique, maybe you need to try Window-Arrange-New Window in CS3 or later in order to have a visualization of what the work in progress is looking like. You certainly did a great job with it. I don't know the book, I'm afraid, but I'm not always a fan of his images. However, fair do's, that Layer masking technique is the best I've encountered by miles and is far better than the one in The New CCD Astronomy, which is pretty stone age in the edition I have.

Olly

[obscura]

Olly, my thanks to you for your help and suggestions leading me to the second image. I had tried Starizona's layer/masking method which I'm sure works well. Knowing just a little more now, I may give that another go one day, but for the time being, Jerry's suits well.

With a full moon hanging over Orion I fear that its not the night for Flame and HH. Another day.

Best Regards

Brian