The Heart Nebula

[Mr_42tr0nomy]

Hey all!

Last night, between the times in which the sky was covered with those big white fluffy things, I was able to capture 2 and half hours of data on the Heart Nebula. My OIII filter should be coming in soon (been over three weeks!! arrggghh! ) and Im pumped to see this one in color!

I used the 102mm apo, atik 414 and the Orion Atlas.

Exposure times: 6x1500s and 2x600s

 

Enjoy and Clear skies!  Any constructive criticism is highly encouraged

 

full res attchd. Pictures posted in text like the one below always seems to appear of much better quality when simply enlarged.

 

heart nebula.psd

[robhatherton]

Very nice, I couldn't even see it last night with my 120mm achro! Perhaps that was because at 11.30 it still wasn't quite dark?

[seo]

Nice work. Congrats.

In my opinion and eyes, a bit more contrast or stretching (don't know which of these two will work best) should reveal better the nebulosity and give a bit more 3d like effect.

 

[Rodd]

Wow--that's quite a scale for a 102mm FL--Must be that ATIK.  Whats the pixel size on that camera?  This makes one think that a larger arpeture scope is not needed at all for DSOs.  A conclusion I am coming to on my own as well!

[Rodd]

Nope not teh pixel size (6.45 or something).  What is teh FL of that scope?  Looks like it was taken near 1,800mm!!!

[Rodd]

I hope you don't mind me posting an image I took with the C11 edge at fl 1,960--its a horrific image I took a long time ago--but its the scale I am amazed at in your image.  Note your scale is almost the same as mine (bigger FOV of course).  The pixel size on my STT-8300 is 5.4--smaller than yours!.  I feel like I have just unlearned everything I knew (this happens to me about once a month in this hobby).  Again--ignore the atrocious processing in my image.  

[PatrickGilliland]

Looking good - be nice to see the colour version to, only thing i can see that might need adjusting, but would wait until you have O3 data is loosing some brightness around the main knots.  ALl goo otherwise  Paddy

[laudropb]

Very nice image.

[Mr_42tr0nomy]

20 hours ago, Rodd said:

Nope not teh pixel size (6.45 or something).  What is teh FL of that scope?  Looks like it was taken near 1,800mm!!!

The focal length is 714 I believe, or 703, so definitely not 1800! haha, And what you makes you say 1800, the field of view?

[Rodd]

1 hour ago, Mr_42tr0nomy said:

The focal length is 714 I believe, or 703, so definitely not 1800! haha, And what you makes you say 1800, the field of view?

No--the scale of your image is almost the same as mine!  Details of the Heart (Melotte 15) are as big as mine (or almost).

[Mr_42tr0nomy]

6 minutes ago, Rodd said:

No--the scale of your image is almost the same as mine!  Details of the Heart (Melotte 15) are as big as mine (or almost).

AHH, I see. I have been thoroughly impressed with details. Now that Im getting 2700s exposures the details are really starting to show. I cannot wait until I can do some HaLrgb on some galaxies and see how well the details show. Itll be awhile until i get the astrodon E series second gen LRGB filters :/

[Rodd]

7 hours ago, Mr_42tr0nomy said:

AHH, I see. I have been thoroughly impressed with details. Now that Im getting 2700s exposures the details are really starting to show. I cannot wait until I can do some HaLrgb on some galaxies and see how well the details show. Itll be awhile until i get the astrodon E series second gen LRGB filters :/

Its not the clarity of the details that I refer to--but the size.  As you know--2 things effect image scale (size of DSOs--or more correctly--size of the FOV representation on the screen--which is different than the FOV)--FL and pixel size.  Your pixels are larger than mine and your FL is smaller (more than 100% smaller!)--yet your "details"  (certain features--like a knot in a nebula, or Melotte 15 itself (the cork screw feature and star cluster)) are as big as mine.