M33 LRGB

[Tiny Small]

This is only my second proper image with my new camera and the only the second LRGB image I've done. I think lots of the issues with the first have been resolved in this, but not all. My processing needs work too.

ASI178MM-Cool

133 x 120s Lum @ -20C

30 x 60s RGB @ -20C

130 PDS on an NEQ6

Stacked in DSS and processed in Photoshop CS5

 

[Tiny Small]

A quick correction to the colour as it was missing a fair bit of red:

 

 

[sagramore]

I came here from the 130PDS imaging thread to see what camera you used (I have the 130PDS and NEQ6). Had to be CCD because I can't imagine getting this with my unmodded DSLR

Just wanted to say this is absolutely gorgeous! 

 

I can see the "bite" from the focus tube you mentioned still being a slight problem. A couple of us from that thread have had luck with a completely reversible mod to bring the primary up the tube a bit, which pushes the focus tube out further. That could be something you consider doing if you don't want to chop any more off the draw tube than you have done already?

Either way, brilliant, and I can only dream of such a nice image. Thanks for sharing. I can only imagine what you could achieve with longer subs (auto guiding?).

[Tiny Small]

52 minutes ago, sagramore said:

I came here from the 130PDS imaging thread to see what camera you used (I have the 130PDS and NEQ6). Had to be CCD because I can't imagine getting this with my unmodded DSLR

Just wanted to say this is absolutely gorgeous! 

 

I can see the "bite" from the focus tube you mentioned still being a slight problem. A couple of us from that thread have had luck with a completely reversible mod to bring the primary up the tube a bit, which pushes the focus tube out further. That could be something you consider doing if you don't want to chop any more off the draw tube than you have done already?

Either way, brilliant, and I can only dream of such a nice image. Thanks for sharing. I can only imagine what you could achieve with longer subs (auto guiding?).

Ta very much. I am autoguiding but the camera is a cmos so in visible light, short subs but more of them tend to work better. Though I could probably go to 300 seconds before it blows out completely. For that though, it would need to be a very dark night. 3 minute subs would work though and would add a fair bit more I think. Tried narrowband the other night with 7nm filters. That's going to need 600-900 second exposures I think. 

[PatrickGilliland]

Hi Tiny, nice work so far.  I think there is more in there though, the background levels are not correct and sorting this will likely reveal a lot more detail and contrast.

Paddy

[Tiny Small]

18 hours ago, PatrickGilliland said:

Hi Tiny, nice work so far.  I think there is more in there though, the background levels are not correct and sorting this will likely reveal a lot more detail and contrast.

Paddy

Having had a break away from it, I can see exactly what you're on about. I'm always worried about making the background too dark and tend to be a little conservative at times. Had another go and tidied up some artefacts that were lurking in the background.

 

 

 

 

[PatrickGilliland]

32 minutes ago, Tiny Small said:

Having had a break away from it, I can see exactly what you're on about. I'm always worried about making the background too dark and tend to be a little conservative at times. Had another go and tidied up some artefacts that were lurking in the background.

Still a shed load more in there looks like good data.

Try first experimenting with levels and curves then adjusting colours and it will start to reveal itself.

£0 seconds shows lot more there in that data so persevere with it.  Levels, curves, maybe try high pass filter (I ran LHE in PI on it), saturation and selective colour will start to release all that extra data.

This is too blue but you can see that its there if you want it   Looks like there will be some super detail around the core on full data set.

Paddy 

 

[Mr Spock]

48 minutes ago, Tiny Small said:

Having had a break away from it, I can see exactly what you're on about. I'm always worried about making the background too dark and tend to be a little conservative at times. Had another go and tidied up some artefacts that were lurking in the background.

 

 

 

 

Very nice image. It's starting to look really good.

[Tiny Small]

2 hours ago, PatrickGilliland said:

Still a shed load more in there looks like good data.

Try first experimenting with levels and curves then adjusting colours and it will start to reveal itself.

£0 seconds shows lot more there in that data so persevere with it.  Levels, curves, maybe try high pass filter (I ran LHE in PI on it), saturation and selective colour will start to release all that extra data.

This is too blue but you can see that its there if you want it   Looks like there will be some super detail around the core on full data set.

Paddy 

 

I don't have PI, just Photoshop, however, I've pushed it a little further and I think this is as far as I can go as the image is really starting to breakdown now. Though, I might have another go from stacking.

 

 

 

[PatrickGilliland]

2 hours ago, Tiny Small said:

I don't have PI, just Photoshop, however, I've pushed it a little further and I think this is as far as I can go as the image is really starting to breakdown now. Though, I might have another go from stacking.

Sometimes a fresh start is best way - some clear objectives will help guide you through the processing. Paddy

[meryck]

Absolutely beautiful. Well done!