Jump to content

NLCbanner2024.jpg.2478be509670e60c2d6efd04834b8b47.jpg

M35, Jellyfish, Monkey Head and all stations west...

ollypenrice

By ollypenrice
in Imaging - Deep Sky

Recommended Posts

ollypenrice

ollypenrice

Posted
Posted

One of those fatal temptations. We 'just' did a nice Jellyfish, HaOIIILRGB. But, see, M35 was so close along with whatsisname, that little powdery fella, NGC (just looking it up...) 2158. Hmmm. But, blow me, the Monkey Head is not too far off either and there's that (looking it up now) Sh2-147 there as well. Pity this will need a 4 panel when it scarely needs more than a two panel, but there you go.  :BangHead:  So after about 50 hours and three scopes (2xTak FSQ106N and 1xTEC140) Olly and guests and Tom and Yves can offer you this;

IC443%20etc%2050%20Hrs-L.jpg

Or at half size, https://ollypenrice.smugmug.com/Other/Best-of-Les-Granges/i-bRnxB8k/0/O/IC443%20etc%2050%20Hrs.jpg

And that will be all before Christmas, folks. (We may shoot a bit more but it's for another mosaic.)

Cheers,

Olly

Link to comment
Share on other sites
swag72

swag72

Posted
Posted

I like this - The elements are interesting to see in their natural environment and natural orientation. Here's a question - The monkey head seems to be quite a different colour to the jelly fish - Is this really the case or is it that there's been some finer resolution data added into one target more than the other?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
ollypenrice

ollypenrice

Posted
  • Author
Posted

I like this - The elements are interesting to see in their natural environment and natural orientation. Here's a question - The monkey head seems to be quite a different colour to the jelly fish - Is this really the case or is it that there's been some finer resolution data added into one target more than the other?

I think they are different colours. The Jellyfish always wants to turn out a rather flat musty pink in my images (and in many others). Here's an old one. 

NGC443%20HaRGB%20sRGB-M.jpg

I've never been convinced by this colour. Why should both foreground and background objects come out in this odd way, unlike other Ha emission regions? Maybe due to absorption by something in the light path? Anyway in the latest version, which has OIII for the first time, I found a small colour balance tweak and moved away from the fusty pink so I went with it. The Monkey Head is an unusual Ha object because it rises very suddenly out of nothing and is very intense in signal almost from its outer edges. It's also a good bit brighter. Also , in the SN remnant the OIII forms an outer shell whereas in the Monkey Head it's in the centre of the object so that would strongly influence the colour. Whether my colours are consistent across the two objects, though, is impossible for me to say.

I do need to sort out the background on the mosaic. Seeing it with less tired eyes and on the web reveals a bit of a patchwork! I'll have a go at that today.

Olly

Link to comment
Share on other sites
ollypenrice

ollypenrice

Posted
  • Author
Posted

Now that I've got Pixinsight's background neutralization to work again I've been able to clean up the background and make some other adjustments. The background still looks bouncy on the web but it seems OK on my screen in Ps.

IC443%20M35%20Monkeyhead%20HaOIIILRGB2%2

For a cruise around the details, https://ollypenrice.smugmug.com/Other/Best-of-Les-Granges/i-zfx3wdB/0/O/IC443%20M35%20Monkeyhead%20HaOIIILRGB2%20WEB.jpg

Here's the Monkey Ha layer I used from the TEC.

Monkey%20Head%20Ha%20Web-L.jpg

Olly

Link to comment
Share on other sites
ollypenrice

ollypenrice

Posted
  • Author
Posted

Impressive, and so much to see in such a small patch of sky. I studied your image with sky atlas in ha

Thanks. It was the sky atlas that got me into this remarkably difficult project to start with! I just can't resist trying to image things not normally seen together. It's quite interestng to have M35 for scale, since it's usually a 'big' cluster at the EP which puts the sizes of the nebulae into context.

BTW, the background sky is getting steadily better but I won't keep re-posting! I've done plenty of mosaics filled with nebulosity and, thinking about it, ones not filled with nebulosity seem to be harder!

Olly

Link to comment
Share on other sites
ollypenrice

ollypenrice

Posted
  • Author
Posted

Well done Olly and co. :)

I can capture lots of nebulosity where I am now. The only trouble is that it's only about 500' above my head! :(

We could collaborate! I have exactly the same stuff over my obervatories as well... I don't know about your nebulosity but I think I'd call mine 'widefield...'  :BangHead:

Olly

Link to comment
Share on other sites
pyrasanth

pyrasanth

Posted
Posted

That's a very red Jellyfish- I posted an image I took last year of some of the Jellyfish. Let me know if it's okay for me to post in this thread- if not you will need to hunt it out by doing a search- I think the colours in mine are less dramatic but as always your image is better!

Link to comment
Share on other sites
ollypenrice

ollypenrice

Posted
  • Author
Posted

That's a very red Jellyfish- I posted an image I took last year of some of the Jellyfish. Let me know if it's okay for me to post in this thread- if not you will need to hunt it out by doing a search- I think the colours in mine are less dramatic but as always your image is better!

It is, I know, but I wanted to get away from the habitual 'Jellyfish deep pink' in part because I doubt its veracity. This is a massively Ha dominated object with OIII only in the outer shell (like the Crescent.) I think that the shade of red can be debated but I guess it has to be red. In my RGB data the red is rather deeper than in this enhanced HaRGB version. Please post away, I don't mind at all and would be interested in how you found the colour...

A Lovely image Olly, great to see it all in this way.

Is this as shot or is it inverted in any way?

Ray

Nope, this is as the object is orientated so north is up. It covers about 4.6 x 5 degrees.

I've just noticed that, with a ridiculous amount of work, we could connect it with Simeis 147 of which Tom has an excellent image already. For heaven's sake don't tell him or he'll make me do it!!!  :grin:  :grin:

Olly

(And Simeis could be connected the Faming Star. Noooooooooooooooooooooooo   :eek: )

Link to comment
Share on other sites
opticalpath

opticalpath

Posted
Posted

Wow, what a gourmet feast!

In fact, it's such a plateful of goodies in one helping, my eye doesn't quite know where to settle ... which I suppose can present a challenge when you're figuring out the best way to frame so much.

Quite apart from the fabulous objects in the image, what also really caught my eye were the stars - exquisite!

Adrian

Link to comment
Share on other sites
pyrasanth

pyrasanth

Posted
Posted

Thanks Olly,

This is my version in narrow band but it was taken when I first started with the Celestron 11". I know it has all the things you hate like a very deep black but I tried to make the image interesting-so it's not a very accurate representation.

post-36426-0-63385000-1450200868_thumb.j

Link to comment
Share on other sites
ollypenrice

ollypenrice

Posted
  • Author
Posted

Thanks Olly,

This is my version in narrow band but it was taken when I first started with the Celestron 11". I know it has all the things you hate like a very deep black but I tried to make the image interesting-so it's not a very accurate representation.

attachicon.giffinal-image-ic443.jpg

I don't think it's a matter of liking or not liking but this image is certainly black clipped by a very large margin. You've removed a great deal of faint data. If you look at mine or others you'll see that the 'tendril' connecting the SNR with the background nebulosity does not have a hard cutoff. It just doesn't. It fades gently into the background. If that is the case in just one posted image then it is the case. It can't be invented. On the other hand hard cutoffs can certainly be invented and frequently are. Do I mean you, Pixinsight fanboys? Maybe I do!

I don't know how you mapped this colour but it has nothing to do with natural colour (broadband) imaging. There is no reason why it should, let me stress. Colour mapping is fine by me but I'm a natural colour imager (well...!!!!) to the best of my ablilty. But the Jellyfish is not magenta and yellow. Not a chance.

Olly

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue. By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.