How to improve?

[RetroArchangel]

Hi All,

First post on SGL!

I have been lurking for too long. Decided to post one of my first images. Any and all advice gratefully received. What I really want to know is how to improve. Is it just move data or can anyone see fundamental errors?

This is 2 hours Ha from the Horsehead Nebula on my C9.25 with an Atik 314L+.

Thanks

Andy

[ollypenrice]

You're focus is good, your collimation looks good, your guiding looks good (impressive for this FL), your preprocessing seems to have worked and your post processing stretch seems to have pulled out what's there while not tearing up through the noise floor.

(Apart from that it's rubbish!  )

So, nice one. The only way to go further is to take more subs and longer subs. (I say that without knowing how long your subs were but I'm just expressing the principle, especially in narrowband.)

An impressive début which surely belongs on the DS imaging board rather than here.   

Olly

[glowingturnip]

verrry nice, you don't need any advice from me !

[MartinB]

II'll echo what Olly has said.  Is this at F10?  What sub times?  The way forward with narrow band is long subs and plenty of them.  If you aren't already doing so 30mins should be a bare minimum at F10.  Beyond that it is a compromise, if you go too long each lost sub due to cloud or wind is a mini disaster given the importance of overall exposure time.  

At the scale presented here your s/n ratio is holding up ok but a few more hours would help further and allow you to sharpen up the nebulosity.  That's a cracking result from 2 hours using a scope that takes a lot of taming

[Leveye]

I see some strange banding in the darks and some pixelation present. Is this a crop of a larger picture? Aside from that bravo and i wish i'd taken it! -Lev-

[jgs001]

That looks great Andy... nothing I can really offer advice on, except go for more data.

[MartinB]

I see some strange banding in the darks and some pixelation present. Is this a crop of a larger picture? Aside from that bravo and i wish i'd taken it! -Lev-

Those bands aren't artifacts, they're real

[Robbo AR]

I dream of taking images like that one.

Absolutely beautiful image , you should be well pleased with yourself

[RetroArchangel]

Thanks Olly,

High praise indeed. With the weather, work and family I've spent more time browsing SGL than looking through telescope! Read your posts with interest. In fact when I was looking for a second hand CCD I was offered an Atik 4000 OSC that was previously yours! Out if my price range of course, but I was told it had your seal of approval.

This is my 3rd or 4th image - the others were Rubbish, but a useful learning exercise. Lots of reading SGL and Make Every Photon Count.

This was 10min subs. I will have to sort out my polar alignment to go further.

Andy

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[RetroArchangel]

Hi Martin,

Thanks for your comments. I have a Celestron Reducer so about F7 I think. 10 min subs. 30mins feels unobtainable at the moment. I will have to sacrifice a night and learn how to polar align properly!

Andy

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[ollypenrice]

I see no banding and no pixelation (but I do normally spell 'your' correctly!!!) Pixelation at 0.57 arcseconds per pixel doesn't seem likely to me....

It might be worth trying a binned image unless you really have excellent seeing. At least worth a pop.

Olly

Edit, your reducer post just came in but still you'd have a job to pixelate, I think.

[RetroArchangel]

Hi leveye,

The banding is the nebula I think and the pixelation are jpg artefacts I think. Does the image attachment down scale? The fit looks fine.

Andy

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Eddy_]

Very nice, thanks

[Langy]

First post and you stick a great pic on like that.

Well done and keep sharing those!

[Pete Presland]

that is a great image of one of the most wonderful looking objects in the sky! very well captured, i have a C9.25 myself and also the F6.3 reducer, when i finally get around to doing some DSO's with it i hope thay are half as good as this.