Hubble Deep Field challenge anyone?

[physicus]

Bit more analysis on this.  A lot of noise for sure, but I'm claiming four fuzzies that match up with the original Hubble pic. 

[Macavity]

Well, I'm definitely convinced!  (Great work, Tim)

Plus I now have yet more stolen charts to play with. 

The "Joy of Collaboration" and all that. (Seriously!) 

So... my "surrounding objects" WERE real enough.

And maybe just that little bit more... 

[Dragon Man]

This is a great project. I look forward to seeing peoples results.

I have had a fiddle with Tim Jones' image and have labelled more galaxies.

The hard part identifying them is because the sensors we use are sensitive to Infra Red, so that some tiny Galaxies high in IR glow bigger than they are, and some galaxies that are huge may have low IR which makes them disappear.

But here are some more I found in his image. There's probably more if anyone wants to search:

HDF Tim Jones.psd

[Dragon Man]

Tim, I forgot to mention what I did to your image to obtain the other galaxies.

I took it into PhotoShop and cropped it, rotated it, and then enlarged it. Then I used 'Colour Blotch Reduction' in Actions to remove the coloured blotching, then used Curves to highlight the detail in the lighter areas.

A lot of it is Noise but many are recognisable as Galaxies, and their locations match the Hubble image.

Well done!  

[physicus]

Hey, Ken - nice job on my data.  I like the idea of you chewing away on it in Oz while I'm sleeping upside down on the other side of the planet  .   If ever there was a case of every pixel counting !    On the IR discussion, my 7D still has its IR filter in place on the sensor  (i.e. unmodded), so I guess in my case IR rich galaxies will be relatively subdued ? 

To try for some shape to the objects, I'm tempted to take the reducer out - challenging as that will be at, f10 2350mm, for light gathering and guiding.  Wind blowing my rig is the killer.     

[physicus]

Ah, never heard of 'Colour Blotch Reduction', Ken.   Have to check that one out.  You did well, especially working from a jpeg etc.

[Dragon Man]

Hey, Ken - nice job on my data.  I like the idea of you chewing away on it in Oz while I'm sleeping upside down on the other side of the planet  .   If ever there was a case of every pixel counting !    On the IR discussion, my 7D still has its IR filter in place on the sensor  (i.e. unmodded), so I guess in my case IR rich galaxies will be relatively subdued ? 

To try for some shape to the objects, I'm tempted to take the reducer out - challenging as that will be at, f10 2350mm, for light gathering and guiding.  Wind blowing my rig is the killer.     

Ah, never heard of 'Colour Blotch Reduction', Ken.   Have to check that one out.  You did well, especially working from a jpeg etc.

Tim, I really enjoy searching for super faint, super distant Galaxies and Galaxy Clusters. They are my favourite objects in Astronomy, so it was a pleasure to play 'Spot The Galaxy' in your image    

Yes it made it harder working with a Jpeg, and a compressed one at that! 

Your camera's IR filter will be stopping many Galaxies showing up because most Galaxies are IR rich. Without the Filter they would glow more.

'Colour Blotch reduction' is in Noel Carboni's Actions for PhotoShop. http://www.prodigitalsoftware.com/Astronomy_Tools_For_Full_Version.html

Best thing invented since Sliced Nebula and the Ball-Point Telescope    

Yes, by all means take out the focal reducer and target the area again. Pity you can't remove your IR filter easily.

If wind is a problem taking 10 x 3 minute exposures, try taking 40 or 50 x 2 minute exposures and stack the best of them. It will also improve the detail by having many more frames at shorter times. Then do all your Photoshop enhancements on the stacked image.

They are there to find. You've already proved that 

[laser_jock99]

Taking a lead from Tims post, I plotted the outline of the HDF on my image and posted the HDF alongside. With the four main galaxies highlighted it becomes easier to pick out maybe half a dozen of the real faint ones from the noise.

Not bad for just a 3 minute unguided sub!

Full Size Version

http://astrob.in/full/174343/0/

[physicus]

Yeah, makes you wonder if there really is a space telescope up there at all.

[laser_jock99]

Yeah, makes you wonder if there really is a space telescope up there at all.

There's probably about five 'Hubbles' up there (mostly looking earthward). The space telescope Hubble is made from left over parts (including the dodgy mirror) from a spy satelite program if you believe what you read on the Internet!

[physicus]

There's probably about five 'Hubbles' up there (mostly looking earthward). The space telescope Hubble is made from left over parts (including the dodgy mirror) from a spy satelite program if you believe what you read on the Internet!

I remember this SciFri podcast from 2012.  I like "they're better quality than NASA has ever needed" http://www.npr.org/2012/06/08/154587996/ex-spy-telescopes-may-aid-hunt-for-dark-energy

[nytecam]

Got the HUbble DF last night in 20m exp in 2m subs - Lodestar saturates over 2m exp @ f4 in 30cm SCT here in LP London.  Image very noisy and will post when I've cleaned it up a bit!   Got the three brightest gx for sure and maybe more. 

Here's the goto starting point in gx NGC $605 - then north then east a little. 

[Macavity]

Aaargh - Enough is enough! (Too many graphical fiddlings)

Trying to improve on my previous "blank canvas" I repeated the

exercise with 250 events (10s / 256x integ) on the Watec 120N+

2.5x times total  exposure should give me an extra magnitude?

And indeed mysterious things began to appear...

Still had trouble matching HDF "geometry", but semi free-hand

seems to match (rather better!) with some of above efforts?

And I (too) suspect that's about the (my) limit! The Lodestar 2X

(new Watec 910XH) uses the 4x-more-sensitive chip... And I'm

using an 8" (not 12")  f/4. So need forty (not three) minutes! 

[nytecam]

Here's my Hubble Deep Field from last night - data on image. I'm confident the 6 brightest gx are captured but no more in 20min exposure - 8 min and 4 min exps also included.

Note gx to extreme left merges with a star - both are just resolved in my original images - Fun but hell-of-a-struggle ;-)

[nytecam]

Here's my follow-up montage with main shot 4m exp that just shows 2gx as marked and 20min crop at top with 6 gx recorded. hope it's of interest ;-)

[schmeah]

Great stuff! Keep it coming.

Derek