Not seeing Rosette Nebula?

[migeek]

The other night I went out and got about 15 minutes of data on Rosette, 5x3 minute's, I stacked it and went to go level out the histogram but for whatever reason I can't seem to find the nebula. Do I not have enough data to even make it out? Don't mind the red, its from my DSLR being modified (I do have a IR/UV filter in place too)  If anyone has any suggestions or help, Thanks guys!

[wxsatuser]

The centre of the nebula is that cluster, NGC 2244, that is just right above centre.

You need to subtract the red and may be you will see the nebula, assuming the red is LP.

[migeek]

Thanks for the reply wxsatuser, I posted the wrong picture... Here's the adjusted picture, still nothing.
 

[almcl]

It looks as though you have quite a bit of light pollution reflecting off some thin upper cloud.  Unfortunately a lot of the Rosette is down the red end of the spectrum so removing the 'red' to take out the LP will also remove much of the target.  I think the Rosette is there but rather masked

Not sure what processing software you are using?  But there are some stacking artefacts (mostly on the left edge) which can interfere with stretching.

Do you have or can you get a light pollution filter?  It might help with this target which is getting a bit low at this time of the year.

[wxsatuser]

It does look like cloud, if it is, won't be able to shift it.

If you had more subs and dithered there might have been a chance.

[migeek]

Thanks for the replies guys! It's definitely light from an unblocked eyepiece hole on my camera on the other end of the scope that has since been taken care of. I'll try to shoot it again in one of the upcoming clear nights before it's gone. I am planning on picking up an Orion Skyglow Imaging 2" Filter, hopefully that will help combat whatever else LP is in the frame.

I use DeepSkyStacker to stack it and have been using PixInsight to balance the histogram, not much else at this point.

 

Thanks Guys!

[PeterCPC]

If I understood your post, you are using a modified DSLR but you then said that you were using an IR filter. By using this filter you have, in effect, unmodded your camera. When you use a modded camera do not use an IR filter.

Peter

[migeek]

Hey PeterCPC, could you elaborate? I thought you modded the DSLR for full spectrum and then put in a uv/ir filter to limit the seen wavelengths to say h-alpha? Doesn't UV and IR let too much light in?

[PeterCPC]

Depending on the mod. This is from the Astronomiser site:

Filter removal:

This involves removing the rear colour correcting filter and increases the camera's sensitivity to red light frequencies by between 4 and 5 times, meaning that the amount of Ha response on the sensor post mod for a 5 minute shot is equivalent to between 20 and 25 minutes of exposure before modding. If you intend to use a camera solely for astrophotography, this is the mod you should choose.

Full Spectrum mod:

A full spectrum mod is one where the full electromagnetic spectrum that the sensor is able to detect is allowed through with **NO FILTERING** - the sensor can detect light in far and near infrared and ultraviolet - to allow this full spectrum of light (visible and non-visible light) through, all filters must be removed. A camera modded thusly would require UV and IR filtering for use with anything other than a parabolic mirror system and would only normally be carried out if the photographer wishes to do either IR photography or spectrographic analysis using a diffraction grating.

My modded camera is the first type and lets in more red - an IR filter would block it.

Peter

[migeek]

3 minutes ago, PeterCPC said:

Depending on the mod. This is from the Astronomiser site:

Filter removal:

This involves removing the rear colour correcting filter and increases the camera's sensitivity to red light frequencies by between 4 and 5 times, meaning that the amount of Ha response on the sensor post mod for a 5 minute shot is equivalent to between 20 and 25 minutes of exposure before modding. If you intend to use a camera solely for astrophotography, this is the mod you should choose.

Full Spectrum mod:

A full spectrum mod is one where the full electromagnetic spectrum that the sensor is able to detect is allowed through with **NO FILTERING** - the sensor can detect light in far and near infrared and ultraviolet - to allow this full spectrum of light (visible and non-visible light) through, all filters must be removed. A camera modded thusly would require UV and IR filtering for use with anything other than a parabolic mirror system and would only normally be carried out if the photographer wishes to do either IR photography or spectrographic analysis using a diffraction grating.

My modded camera is the first type and lets in more red - an IR filter would block it.

Peter

I bought my camera used from a friend a few months back, I believe its fully spectrum modified. It feels like ages since I got it and we talked about all that stuff. I'm sure there's no easy way to tell which mod has been performed. Would it hurt to take the IR/UV block out and see what happens? It's just a Astronomik clip-in

[PeterCPC]

Try it and see. You may find that you get slightly bloated stars but it's worth trying. When I bought my filter modded camera I was told not to use an IR filter unless bloated stars appeared and that does not seem to be an issue with mine. This site may help explain some of this http://www.astronomiser.co.uk/eosmod.htm

Peter

[migeek]

Hey Thanks Peter! Appreciate the help!

[PeterCPC]

This is an image of the Rosette taken with my modded camera

Peter

[migeek]

Wow man, that's gorgeous! Very nice work!!!

[gorann]

It all depends on the IR filter. You should use one that does not block Ha, which is well within the visible red, and not in infrared (IR), so a good filter will not block it (serious filter manufacturers will present a spectrum of the filter revealing if it blocks Ha or not). The reason you want an IR filter (and UV filter) is that neither camera lenses, not telescopes, are adjusted optically to put UV and IR light at the same focal plane as visible light, so any UV and IR light reaching the sensor will be out of focus and blurring the image. So, you are better off without IR light. My factory modded Canon 60Da lets through most Ha but it has an IR and UV filter. This is what the Rosette looked like with it last time i checked in January. Your ES ED80 should frame it better (I unfortunately scalped it with my ES ED127)

[migeek]

Thanks Goran! That's what I thought originally, my clip-in filter only blocks UV/IR and lets all else through, shouldn't affect the h-alpha at all.

[carastro]

I think clouds and the IR filter might be partly responsible, 3min subs is not that long for a DSLR are you guiding, if so you need to do 5 minutes and even then you might not see anything until you process.

Carole 

 

[sharkmelley]

1 hour ago, migeek said:

Thanks Goran! That's what I thought originally, my clip-in filter only blocks UV/IR and lets all else through, shouldn't affect the h-alpha at all.

Agreed.  A UV/IR block filter designed for astronomy will not block any H-alpha.  It is recommended to use such a filter on refractive optics with a full spectrum camera because otherwise unblocked longer wavelength IR light does not come to focus in the focal place of visible light and causes star bloat.

Mark

[migeek]

Thanks carastro and sharkmelley, I am shooting with an Explore Scientific 80mm ED APO refractor and it was my understanding your explanation was what I thought as well. It was pretty clear that night, I do know for a fact the overbearing haze and the red light was due to light coming in the eye hole on my camera and has since been fixed by covering it with a eyepiece cover. I am guiding and I'll try for 5 minute subs next time to see if I can pull out anything else. Thanks Guys!

[gorann]

Getting in light through the viewfinder is a possibility if you have a light source nearby - I never had a problem with it but I keep it dark around when I do exposures.