M45

[gnomus]

First decent night for some time on Friday:

24 x 5 mins R

24 x 5 mins G

23 x 5 mins B

My Lums were awful - taken late on as M45 set and full of LP:

[toxic]

very nice subaru

[nucdoc]

Very nice, I love the colour

[gnomus]

very nice subaru

I had to look that one up. I didn't know that before - thank you.

[Martin-Devon]

Nice capture Steve, good star colour and nebulosity coming through. 

Martin

[gnomus]

Minor tweaks:

[Barry-Wilson]

Lovely Steve: you must be pleased!

[gnomus]

Thanks Barry - there are some things I like about it - unlike my usual efforts, I do seem to have been able to keep some colour in the stars this time.  There are other things that I think I could have done better - some folks seem to be able to pull out the faint peripheral nebulosity more than I have done.  I did try to do this but it very quickly turned into a dog's breakfast.  

Incidentally, I found your workflow example very helpful as I worked on this: http://stargazerslounge.com/topic/254991-ngc1333-amidst-a-sea-of-dust/page-2#entry2782679

[Scott]

Very impressive. Beautiful stars and a delicate nebulosity. Well done you

[gnomus]

That is very kind of you Scott, Martin and nucdoc.

[laser_jock99]

Nice M45.

[steppenwolf]

This is very nice indeed, Steve - I particularly like the star colours.

[Stargazer33]

Beautiful image.

[gnomus]

Thank you laser, Bryan and Steve. The second image is the whole FOV of the Williams Optics Star 71 plus an Atik 383L camera.

[ollypenrice]

I think that's tremendous with a slight preference, maybe, for the first. The issue discussed on the flats thread is beginning to appear in version two, no?

Your capture of the faint reds is one of the the things that sets this apart. (I remember having to fight my corner on their veracity a few years ago but exist they do.) The strong red stars make all the diffrence to the overall look as well.

The streamers need an enormous amount of data to pull out satisfactorily. I think this is remarkably deep as it is.

Olly

[swag72]

Nice one Steve - This is taken with the WO Star 71? Have you still got the Tak BabyQ?

[Stu1976j]

Wonderful M45 such great detail 

[gnomus]

I think that's tremendous with a slight preference, maybe, for the first. The issue discussed on the flats thread is beginning to appear in version two, no?

Your capture of the faint reds is one of the the things that sets this apart. (I remember having to fight my corner on their veracity a few years ago but exist they do.) The strong red stars make all the diffrence to the overall look as well.

The streamers need an enormous amount of data to pull out satisfactorily. I think this is remarkably deep as it is.

Olly

Thanks Olly.  You are good noticing the 'issue' - I'd worked hard with the saturation tool and selective colour tool in PS to try to disguise it.  It seems only to affect the blue filter (in the LRGB set), but the blue flats are fine.  I have had a response from Baader which I will post on the thread you mention presently. 

Thanks also for the reassurance regarding the reds.  I thought it was an artefact!

[gnomus]

Nice one Steve - This is taken with the WO Star 71? Have you still got the Tak BabyQ?

Thanks Sara.  Yes it is with the Star 71.  I returned the Baby Q.  

[gnomus]

Wonderful M45 such great detail 

Thanks Stu

[Peakedge]

Cracking image. Inspires me to try harder!

David

[gnomus]

Thank you for your kind words David.

[Tom OD]

I see the Reds too so that's a good capture.

Tom.

[gnomus]

Thanks Tom.

[gnomus]

On 20/01/2016 at 13:55, Tom OD said:

I see the Reds too so that's a good capture.
Tom.

In fact I should come clean.  I was so certain that my 'reds' were an artefact that I 'lassoed' them in PS and reduced the red saturation.  This is what my reds looked like initially - (Incidentally, I've dragged a bit more detail out of the faint stuff.  But this is at the expense of the background which has gone a little 'lumpier' than I would like - so I am not entirely sure which I prefer) - is this too red?