Hubble Deep Field challenge anyone?

[Macavity]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/articles/4rkllmq3y0zJzQKckh3lkp6/locate-and-image-the-hubble-deep-field

As seen on Sky@Night! Sort of thing Video Astronomers might do?  

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hubble_Deep_Field (for the coordinates)

Zooming in on 2.5 arc minute fields might be "step-wise" here, but... 

[Cath]

Pete popped up and mentioned it too ..

http://stargazerslounge.com/topic/241588-so-whos-up-for-the-challenge/?hl=%2Bchallenge#entry2622699

[Tinker1947]

Its a shame they never showed a spiral galaxy face on....

[Macavity]

Thanks for useful cross reference, Cath.

The brighter things look non-impossible?  

Pete popped up and mentioned it too ..

http://stargazerslounge.com/topic/241588-so-whos-up-for-the-challenge/?hl=%2Bchallenge#entry2622699

[f15p5]

These objects are so small, imagine trying to do a long exposure at 6000mm focal length to get the same image scale using a 1/3" chip. For a 1/2" chip it would be even longer. Perhaps if you have a 42" f 5.6 you might have a chance. I would say even the biggest Galaxy would not be possible in anything less.

[Macavity]

Hmmm... By the time I've cropped it, my 800mm Newt + (nominal) 1/2" chip

gives 24' x 18'. The objects are a "bit small" (lol)... But still rather tempted.

I think I would be reasonably happy if I could vaguely recognise the field...  

I know I can get to mag +18(+?)... But, with no more expectations than that?

[nytecam]

Hmmm... By the time I've cropped it, my 800mm Newt + (nominal) 1/2" chip

gives 24' x 18'. The objects are a "bit small" (lol)... But still rather tempted.

I think I would be reasonably happy if I could vaguely recognise the field...  

I know I can get to mag +18(+?)... But, with no more expectations than that?

Might give it a go. I can get down to m18 here in London but beyond that with longer stacks just add noise :-)

[Martin Meredith]

I've occasionally wondered about pointing the scope to the HDF so I think it's a great idea. At least we can measure progress in sensors/software over the coming years by tackling this challenging target.

In case anyone gives it a go, here's a map with galaxies down to mag 22 and stars to mag 20, centred on the HDF region. The chart shows 3 degrees of dec but the actual HDF region is just 5.3' in width at 12h 36' 49.4", +62deg 12' 58" according to the Wikipedia reference.

HDF.pdf

There are a few mag 18-20 galaxies in that region that some ought to be able to pick up. 

In any case, failing that, there are some nice Abell galaxy clusters hereabouts and a bunch of quasars too. And for many this is circumpolar so worth trying on any good night of the year.

Cheers

Martin

PS still working sporadically on v0.2 of the deep maps…. hope to release something in the next 7-10 days.

[Cath]

Thanks for useful cross reference, Cath.

A cross reference was all it was meant to be, well done for seeing so

[laser_jock99]

Might be able to pick up some of the faint Mag 18-20 galaxies with my Lodestar X2 and 12" F4 scope from my dark sky site. 

The biggest problem will be getting any detail and actually finding the right spot!

[martin_h]

I had a bash at this last night, but alas, with my widefield setup I just dont have the resolution. Found the spot but apart from noise just empty space.

[Starman]

Hi all, Glad you're giving the challenge a go - it certainly is possible to pick out the brighter objects - I got around 7 with a 102mm f/9 scope and a 20min exposure. Last night I had another go with a 250mm scope at f/6.3, this time exposing for 120s with a 2x2 binned CCD. Been in London all day so haven't had a chance to review the results yet. It's my first time trying to image the HDF and I'm really enjoying seeing what I can get back and what others have done. Keep at it and good luck!

Pete Lawrence

[f15p5]

Hi Pete,

Eager to see your results. What was your fov?

Richard

[Colinlp]

Might be complete tosh and I don't have the experience to know otherwise but didn't the Hubble spend 10 days over the Christmas break gathering the deep field image?

[Starman]

It's approximately 30-40 hours of exposures for each of 4 separate filters IIRC - so it's no wonder we are getting only the brightest objects so far. However, I have seen much deeper results still within amateur boundaries, so it's one of those subjects which is rewarding of sheer brute force exposure combinations and dogged determination.

Pete Lawrence

[faulksy]

have i missed sky at night again, dam

[Carl Reade]

My goodness makes you wonder why NASA bothered to place a billion dollar telescope in orbit when they should have just visited here.

Just figured why they didn't its entitled Video Astronomy not Super Long Exposure section........

[laser_jock99]

Okay- my strategy will be to first get nearby galaxy NGC4605 into the centre of the camera FOV. Use the GOTO handset to RECENTRE ON OBJECT (thus comfirming the pointing accuracy in that area). Then manually enter the coodinates 12h 36m 49s +62deg 12' 58".

I don't know whether to use the 12" scope at it's native F4 (1200mm FL) for detail or whether to go for the speed and wider FOV (800mm FL) at F2.9 and so have more chance of hitting the target area?

Then all I need is for some clear skies this weekend.......

[f15p5]

The galaxies in the HDF are really small in apparent size, a wide fov will show things well outside the HDF and not have the image scale to identify anything as a galaxy. I would guess the largest one might show up at around 2500 to 3000mm fl given excellent conditions. The smaller ones 6000mm plus. Remember the entire HDF is tiny patch of sky.

[f15p5]

Just to give an example, the entire fov is smaller than M97 the owl or just slightly larger than M57 the ring.

[RobertI]

Just to give an example, the entire fov is smaller than M97 the owl or just slightly larger than M57 the ring.

Wow, that really puts into perspective how small the area is.

[Macavity]

Since I was in the general area last night...

Actually I was imaging nearby galaxy NGC4605 (Also known as O'Meara "Hidden Treasure" 66!)

Anyway, excuses aside, revisiting the BBC chart: (Yes, I do know the image is upside down!) 

But I was able to take Snapshots of the two regions indicated and also "ID" the stars...

First the stars ones around 76 UMa:

Then the Hubble Deep Field region:

After a lot of MESSING about with different scales, rotations etc.

I was able to derive a "mask" to superimpose on stacked images! 

Pump up the Contrast... And Yes! Smooth a a baby's whatever. 

But I don't think an entirely wasted effort. A longer exposure (This was a mere 20 min)

More careful processing. I'd have been more concerned actually SEEing something?

Aside: Googling around, I came across the MERLIN people's website (qv):

http://www.merlin.ac.uk/ (A fair plug for my one time alma mater maybe?)

If I STEAL one of their images, transpose and superimpose my red circle...

 

 

The surrounding objects not WHOLLY dissimilar maybe? (Hey I can dream!)

Acknowledgements re. above anyway. Happy to remove copyright material etc.

 

II will be interesting to see results other people get - On the BBC Flikr site! 

[laser_jock99]

Okay- my strategy will be to first get nearby galaxy NGC4605 into the centre of the camera FOV. Use the GOTO handset to RECENTRE ON OBJECT (thus comfirming the pointing accuracy in that area). Then manually enter the coodinates 12h 36m 49s +62deg 12' 58".

I don't know whether to use the 12" scope at it's native F4 (1200mm FL) for detail or whether to go for the speed and wider FOV (800mm FL) at F2.9 and so have more chance of hitting the target area?

Then all I need is for some clear skies this weekend.......

Well it nearly all went to plan!

I set up the Lodestar X2 camera on the 12" F4 Newtonian and centred on bright star Alioth.

Then I re-centred 10.9 magnitude galaxy NGC4606 and calibrated this position.

NGC4605 120s Lodstar X2 camera, 12" F4 Newtonian.

At 1200mm focal length the FOV with this camera is very small approximatly 18 x 15 arcminutes. The target area is also small 2.5 x 2.5 arcminutes or about the width of NGC4605 in the above image.

Then I manualy input the HDF coordinates and confirmed the position in ASTROMETRY.NET

My resulting image has the HDF field slightly down & left of dead centre (remember half the width of NGC4605 above). Not a lot to see in there though! Faintest objects are some mag 20 stars I think?

HDF- 120s Lodstar X2, 12" F4 Newtonian (unguided)

EDIT- is there another way of plate solving this image (other than Astrometry.Net) which would ID the fainter objects?

Enhanced crop of the Area Of Interest from a longer 180s exposure- faint galaxies or just noise?

[laser_jock99]

Well it nearly all went to plan!

I set up the Lodestar X2 camera on the 12" F4 Newtonian and centred on bright star Alioth.

Then I re-centred 10.9 magnitude galaxy NGC4606 and calibrated this position.

NGC4605 120s Lodstar X2 camera, 12" F4 Newtonian.

At 1200mm focal length the FOV with this camera is very small approximatly 18 x 15 arcminutes. The target area is also small 2.5 x 2.5 arcminutes or about the width of NGC4605 in the above image.

Then I manualy input the HDF coordinates and confirmed the position in ASTROMETRY.NET

My resulting image has the HDF field slightly down & left of dead centre (remember half the width of NGC4605 above). Not a lot to see in there though! Faintest objects are some mag 20 stars I think?

HDF- 120s Lodstar X2, 12" F4 Newtonian (unguided)

EDIT- is there another way of plate solving this image (other than Astrometry.Net) which would ID the fainter objects?

Enhanced crop of the Area Of Interest from a longer 180s exposure- faint galaxies or just noise?

Based on revised information for the position of HDF I've got seven possible objects in the Deep Field area (not counting the hot pixel!)

[physicus]

So this is my effort from last night.  30 mins total on my C9.25.   I'm happy to have actually found the region and picked up a trace of the Deep Field galaxies; more than I expected when I started.  The Sky at Night finder maps were helpful.  Ended up making a few hard copies of various images and star maps to get the orientations right.  Next personal mile post will be to get a shape to one or more objects in the field.  See how far I can push the humble Canon 7D -  probably the weak link in my chain.  The little Hubble field box is hand drawn, but it's about right .   I also added this to the Sky and Night Flickr Group.

(Full details of the kit: C9.25, 0.63 reducer, 10 x 3mins lights, 10 darks. Canon 7D. OAG with ASI120mm-S/ PHD guiding. Mount AZEQ6. Processed in Nebulosity.)