An Iris Nebula

[MattJenko]

Afternoon All,

Here is an attempt at the Iris Nebula. I tried all kinds of things with this image, probably too many! I dithered for the first time, used drizzle for the first time and had a few processing challenges, the main one being my Lum being about 25 degrees rotated from the RGB images shot on a subsequent night. I was also short in the Blue department, which is unfortunate seeing as this is the main colour, but I gave it a go as impatience got the better of me. I also had to battle unforecast showers, middle of the night guiding failures and setting up out on my front drive to get a northern view, with all the issues and worry that brings.

Nevertheless I thought I would post it up, as it is my longest integration time on an image to date, and I am very happy with how things are going with my imaging and am glad to report I still really enjoy the whole chaotic, frustrating process.

Skywatcher ED80, HEQ5, Atik 414ex. 30 x 15 min L, 10 x 10 min R,G, 5 x 10 min B....

Feedback welcome!

[xtreemchaos]

fantastic pic mate,thanks for sharing.

[Starlight 1]

I see with some pic Stars starting taking on a bit of the blue side. Stars still have lots of white , so yes like it  with out lots of blue.

[RobertI]

Lovely image Matt, some really impressive detail. You can see where you lost the luminance in the corners, interesting demonstration of the difference with and without.

[cfpendock]

I like this very much.

Chris

[MattJenko]

Thanks All,

I actually tried to use the extracted Lum from the RGB image to fill in the gaps in the Lum stack to prevent me having to crop excessively. I had limited success. I will post a separate thread about that, as I tried a few different methods, and this was the least offensive to me, but it is still clear

[johnrt]

Very nice Matt, but.... more blue please, lots more

[toxic]

nice one matt just started getting data on that object my self, well done

[lensman57]

This is really good Matt. But the blue is a little weak otherwise it is a cracking image.

Regards,

A.G

[Sp@ce_d]

Hmmm.. That 414 is a sensitive wee thing.. This is good. One of my fav targets.

Get your missing blue subs at least if you don't manage some more colour overall. Push the saturation in the RGB more because your seven and a half hours of Lum detail is washing it out a bit.. I love dust.. you've got loads. Before I had the Obsy, I would run masking tape down the length of the imaging train and draw a line down it. Then carefully cut the joints with a blade. That way I could re align everything when I set it up again.

[MattJenko]

Very nice Matt, but.... more blue please, lots more

Get your missing blue subs at least if you don't manage some more colour overall. .

"As you wish..."

Here is a lot more colour. 12 x 15min Blue and a few more R + G 10 mins for good measure. I have been processing this for pretty much the entire day, and it has been a right old struggle, but here it is anyway.

I think I need a break and possibly to start from the beginning   !!

[ollypenrice]

Easy does it. I've just processed some Iris sent to me by a guest, today. If you want to take on the 'massive stuctural dust' brigade on the net you need to match them in terms of vast exposure times and dark skies and, sometimes, exotically expensive super-cooled cameras. If you don't you need to go easy on what structure you can pull out of the dust. I think it is always better to take slightly too little out of the data than slightly too much. Keep zooming in and looking at the noise level. When processing dust it soon goes ballistic.

In this case, Matt, I'd settle for a little less.

Olly

[MattJenko]

Less is more. Some worthy guidance - thanks. This image has the most data I have gathered on an object by some distance, so I was getting very bogged down in trying to get the most from it. Ballistic indeed. I had restarted from the beginning about 5 times before simply posting the one above. I have done yet another reprocess from the start, but have taken a more leisurely approach this time (and significantly less time), with more emphasis on simplicity rather than detail and have just let the data I have gathered provide the detail rather than search for it. It does have a much more natural feel I have to admit, which is relief as I think I have spent more time processing this than gathering the data.

[russp]

That is really really nice now

[MattJenko]

At extreme risk of going off topic : just had to say you are no slouch with a camera Russ. Thoroughly enjoyed looking at your flickr stream. May I ask how you managed those from up high shots?

[pietervdv]

Nice data, but I would take it easy with the noise reduction. Some small grain noise in the brown clouds looks more natural.