Another Andromeda - Widefield

[Hytham]

Here is my rendtion of M31 and its neighbours using a widefield approach.  When I first looked at the Ha data I was very surprised to see the amount of Ha in the foreground of the image and it got me  a bit excited.  The more I processed the more I realized that it was in fact very strong, so I took a subtle (at least I think it is) approach and brought it out ever so slightly.  It really can dominate the image and started to take away from the main object.

Comments and criticisms are most certainly welcome.

Equipment:  Tak, FLI, Astrodon, AP
Integration time: 9h

Acquisition details are found here:


Large:


Thank you for looking

 

[Epicycle]

That's a fantastic M31! Brilliant.

[Daniel-K]

love it when people add HA to M31 it really sets the galaxy off showing its jewels, stunning image well done

[Raga]

Stunning. Absolutely stunning.

Very well done.

[Jason71]

That is very good. I really enjoy looking at DSO. Is that how you see it through the telescope .being a beginner at astronomy plus the added fact I don't own a telescope . I wouldn't know , So don't really know what to expect when I do get one.

[Hytham]

That is very good. I really enjoy looking at DSO. Is that how you see it through the telescope .being a beginner at astronomy plus the added fact I don't own a telescope . I wouldn't know , So don't really know what to expect when I do get one.

Hi Jason,

To answer your question bluntly; no.  It will absolutely not looking anything like the image, but if your skies are dark enough and if you have the necessary visual filters you will see the bright core and may be able to resolve the dust lanes.  When I was out in the desert and looking through a 32" scope, Andromeda looked absolutely brilliant.

The lack of colour resolution in darkness is unfortunately a product of our evolution.  Our eyes are made up of two cells; rods and cones.  The rods are more sensitive to dim light settings, but are not able to discern colour, meanwhile the cones in our eyes are adept at detecting light and colour, but are not as capable in the dark.

Now there are some objects that are an exception this rule such as the Orion nebula (and other bright nebulous regions, and globular clusters) where you may be able to discern some colour - it is fully dependent on your eye sight and how good it may be.  It's minute, but detectable.

Regardless of the absence of colour, even when viewed through a scope  in dark enough skies, it's breathtaking to see those faint fuzzies that are over 12million light years away.

Thank you for the kinds words everyone!

-Hytham

[Jason71]

Thanks for the information Hytham. Least when I get a telescope il know what to look for.

[willythebarber1]

absolutely superb mate. i'm only starting astro-imaging and I hope i'll be able to take pic's like that in the future.fair play.

[Mr Bergman]

Absolutely stunning image! 

[jackrussell0232]

Great image, background is a little bright for my taste (maybe the laptop screen), but stunning detail.  

You sometimes see top end kit producing distinctly average pictures, but that's certainly not the case here.

Is this really taken with a 16803 chip? I would have thought the 9 micron pixels would have given noticeable undersampling at this FL? Have you worked around this with dither/drizzle? Would be interested to know, as I've previously only considered that pixel size as suitable for 1500mm++.

And yes, dark skies or not, it's a real shame that we can't get a view like this through the eyepiece!

Top job,

Jack

[ollypenrice]

Now that is my idea of lovely processing. We have a splendid starfield of small, colourful stars. The galaxy has the finest detail without looking forced. 

Well that's it. It's an unusual and a particularly subtle, delicate rendition of M31.

Another low bow from me!

Olly

[SkyJamie]

I completely agree with Olly, spectacular image Hytham!

[Hytham]

Thanks again everyone.  This particular object was just a time fill until my other objects were high enought to shoot and I'm glad I did it.

[Hytham]

Great image, background is a little bright for my taste (maybe the laptop screen), but stunning detail.   You sometimes see top end kit producing distinctly average pictures, but that's certainly not the case here. Is this really taken with a 16803 chip? I would have thought the 9 micron pixels would have given noticeable undersampling at this FL? Have you worked around this with dither/drizzle? Would be interested to know, as I've previously only considered that pixel size as suitable for 1500mm++. And yes, dark skies or not, it's a real shame that we can't get a view like this through the eyepiece! Top job, Jack

Thank you!

This was taken with the 16803 along with my reducer which gives a scale of approximately 4.79"/pixel allowing for a FOV of ~5.45 x 5.45 degrees.

All of my images are undersampled, but it is not as bad as one would expect. You can definitely see it in very rich star fields where many of the smaller stars appear as tiny squares leaving a wonderful artifact.

I do perform a drizzle after every frame and it seems to help, but that statement has not been quantified in any way.