You can't be right all the time.

[Cloudwatcher]

Well,unless your SWMBO of course! Anyhow,enough waffle. The point is that I have discovered the importance of keeping notes when your doing the odd bit of imaging.

When Leo was favorable placed I took a number of images of the area....... usual stuff,the triplet, M65,M66 etc. happy in the firm belief I would know what was which. Not so! I have,off and on,been working on what I fondly believed to be M65,an image that shows promise but yesterday evening I was checking the partially completed image with Starry Night and even allowing for the quality something didn't look right. A lengthy check through the iPhoto library followed and comparisons made............ it turned out to be one of several frames taken of NGC 3521.

This is the image I'm working on...... could be mistaken for M65,don't you think? (Please say yes. I'll feel a lot happier. )

Cheers

CW

PS.This is a working layer so forgive the quality.

Click as usual.

[barkis]

Well, judge for yourself CW. this is a scan of the Image in Messiers Album of M65.

I would say a mistake could easily be forgiven between NGC 3521 and M65.

Ron.

(click to enlarge)

[Cloudwatcher]

Thanks,Ron.

I was beginning to think my eyesight was on the blink.

Heres an improved,updated version which doesn't look like M65. (I hope! )

Cheers

CW

Click as usual.

[barkis]

Well CW., when you study and compare after the event, It's fairly easy to differentiate. but an actual eyepiece comparison may still be a difficult call. Unless you have accurate and calibrated Setting circles.

M65 figures are 11h 16 .3m +13deg. 23min.

Ngc 3521 11h 05 .8m -00deg. 02min.

If panning around, it would be quite easy to get the confusion, in view of their close proximity, although there is a large difference in declination, so only circles, or a thorough knowledge of the starfield would verify.

It has been suggested that Ngc 3521 has a similar structure to M63, The Sunflower Galaxy.

Ron.