Jump to content

Stargazers Lounge Uses Cookies

Like most websites, SGL uses cookies in order to deliver a secure, personalised service, to provide social media functions and to analyse our traffic. Continued use of SGL indicates your acceptance of our cookie policy.

sgl_2019_sp_banner.thumb.jpg.a0ff260c05b90dead5c594e9b4ee9fd0.jpg

swag72

IC1396 - Elephants trunk in mono *2x2 mosaic*

Recommended Posts

In order to get the whole elephants trunk nebula in I needed a 2x2 mosaic - Still should have moved it over slightly, but there you go!!

Captured over a few nights, there's quite a bit of detail in a mono image! 

Details

M: Avalon Linear fast reverse

T: Takahashi FSQ85 0.73x

C: QSI690-wsg with 3nm Ha filter

This is a total of 32x1800s subs, a couple of panes have 9 subs, one has 6 and the other 8. 16 hours in total integration time.

post-5681-0-54396000-1409759968_thumb.jp

You can see a larger image here http://swagastro.weebly.com/recent-images.html

  • Like 15

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And Sara steps up to the plate again :). Another cracker.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My main collaborator doesn't like this object (from memory) because he finds it a bit flat. I do rather like it, though. You have twisted its arm and made it talk! Your treatment of this one has something of the pen and ink drawing about it, big on the scratchy little details. While I wouldn't push it any harder than you have done I do like this new perspective on what can be a rather limp object. I think your very sharp and contrasty processing would make this a brilliant layer to add to an RGB version and would tighten such an image up no end.

I'm a fan!

Olly

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks all for looking and commenting :smiley:

@Olly - I have to say that I agree with your collaborator! I was really surprised at how very flat this target was in the centre of the nebula, hence a bit of punch to try to combat this. It reminded me of the Pacman, which I find so flat I refuse to even contemplate and has to go down as my least favourite of all nebula's thus far.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There's certainly a remarkable amount of detail & resolution in there Sara - you've successfully added the 'punch' as well to bring this alive, the nebulosity dances around like flames in a fire!

Martin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh my, that is fabulous! I just had a look on your website and saw the colour version, which is simply stunning. It makes me think of sand on the beach and all those little sparkly bits in the sun and the patterns that the water and wind make. One to stare out for hours.

I have an ongoing project of this target in HaRGB and I thank you for providing me with a bit of inspiration on how to approach the reprocess!

The only thing that I would say is that the edges, and more so in the colour version than the Ha version, might benefit from a bit of darkening. That area of this object is probably as you have processed it and is fairly flat, but a little artistic burning in around the corners / edges might help to accentuate the bright 'core'.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wow that's a smoking 1396 Sara, possibly the best Mono version I've seen of this object. blumming mavelouse.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Once again mind blowing Sara! How do you take a mosaic? Software or just manually align the separate frames?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Another cracking image, Sara, I think you're getting the hang of this imaging malarkey [emoji2]

Sent from my iPhone from somewhere dark .....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks all for looking and commenting :smiley:

@Olly - I have to say that I agree with your collaborator! I was really surprised at how very flat this target was in the centre of the nebula, hence a bit of punch to try to combat this. It reminded me of the Pacman, which I find so flat I refuse to even contemplate and has to go down as my least favourite of all nebula's thus far.

I think a good dose of the Oiii will bring the center to life. The Packman nebula is one of the most disappointing  targets that I have tried to image in my short imaging life.

A.G

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks very much folks for your comments. A couple of you have seen the bi colour version, so no need to post that now!!

@Gav - Not sure where you think it would benefit from some darkening? On the outer edge of the nebula or the inner?

I'm not sure that OIII would lift the centre much more AG, the OIII really is quite flat in itself - Certainly most of the detail is coming from the Ha.

That's OK, this one is put to bed now in both mono and colour!!!

If anyone is interested, I won't bore you all with another thread for the colour version :grin:

if you want to see it in larger res, it's here http://swagastro.weebly.com/uploads/2/3/3/7/23377322/ic1396_nb.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Phil - Sorry forgot to answer your question .......... I manually align the mosaic panes. I tried software a few times, then one night I was left with a slither where it hadn't joined up properly, From there on in .... manual alignment!!!

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was referring just to the outer corners of the whole image, outside the nebula itself (which is processed to perfection!). Along the lines of the old darkroom technique of burning in the corners an extra stop to accentuate the main focal point of an image.

However, this beautiful image is safely tucked up and snoring contentedly beneath the starry night sky, so ignore my ramblings!

Look forward to the next Wager Opus...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

wow, just wow, again, i seem to say that to almost all of your images these days, you are becoming my inspiration. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you both - Appreciate you looking and commenting.

@Adrian - Not seen you about much lately - How are you?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Very nice, and a good pointer for me on how to approach the same object (I was also toying with the idea of doing a 2x2 project on this). Any particular reason for the differing amount of subs per pane? (noise?).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Cheers Rob - The difference in total pane numbers is due to nothing more than cloud, laziness and impatience! :grin: 3 terrible things to admit in AP!!! 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry Sara, but with an integration time of 30 hours and 30 minutes for this project, I cannot accept you saying that you are lazy or impatient. Clouds, on the other hand, I can accept as a valid reason!!!

As an aside, this is my one thousand and first post... Oh the hours spent on here, it's amazing that I do any work at all...! I do however, feel like an undergraduate studying astrophotography - the learning is PHD level (yes, push here dummy, not doctorate!).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.