M 15 & Planetary Nebula Pease 1

[jsmoraes]

GSO 305 mm - Canon T3 - 23 x 30 seg (11 m 30 s) - ISO 1600 - OAG - Skyglow filter - Coma corrector

 

 

200 % original image scale of Canon T 3  (~ 0.65 arc sec / px)

[Rodd]

Terrific shot.  Is that Pease 1--the little blue dot?  Amazing that you recognized that as a nebula and not a blue star--like the one to the right (maybe that's Pease 2)

[jsmoraes]

Amazing is your comments, Rodd. As far as I know, here is a forum, an enviroment to present and discuss about astronomy. If there is an error of identification or any other kind of mistake, here is a place to change information, correct some misunderstanding, and son on. Not a place to play like a kid, or better, as idiot kid ... as you did.

In years of 2012 I shot for first time this cluster, and reading about him I saw that it is a special one because he has a planetary nebula inside. I tried to find its postion, and I believed that I did.
This year I did a new shot, and very better than the first. I reproduced the position of nebula taking in account the image from 2012.

As I am not a kid, and I don't like to play as idiot, I went to internet to verify if the position is wrong. And it is true: the position is wrong.

I am finding much difficulties to resolve the real position of the nebula. And for all serious mates of this forum -  Rodd not included, of course - I present what I saw.

First a comparisson of my photo with 3 others. Second, a try to find the position, and if I got to capture the nebula.
Up to now, I haven't conclusion !

 

It is very hard and difficult resolve some targets inside of photo. Mainly if you work with non astromic camera, like I do with a stock Canon. Some distortion of field and different optics cause different image of the same area if you work with high resolution (image scale).

If you, mate, has any idea or suggestion to solve that problem of position, feel free to add any comments. But, warning, only serious fellows. I have no time for kidding.

[ChrisLX200]

You appear to have the right position from what I can see, the two 4-star asterisms indicate the approximate location. I can't identify the object in the Whipple image with any degree of certainty. Perhaps it would help if you had a NB image - OIII should show it with better contrast? It's a tough object to identify in such a dense star field.

ChrisH

[jsmoraes]

Thank you for your comment and help, ChrisH.

Quote

It's a tough object to identify in such a dense star field

I agree. I am analysing those photos and others that I catched from Internet for at least 2 hours. There are many difference from one to other. Not only number of stars, but diameter and resolution.
Actually I am not sure if I got to capture the nebula. I think I got limit the area where it would stay using those photos.

But, what I see with my Carte du Ciel using the galatic planetary nebula and UC4 catalogs ... it is very different ... and exactly as my photo !!!!

By Astrometry.net my image scale is around 0.63 arcsec/px. As the images below are with size 200x, the image scale would be around 0.315 arcsec/px. Using the ruler tool in Photoshop I find the the blue target as nebula Pease 1... and in a position very different that those others photos suggest to be the area where the nebula would stay !

 

[jsmoraes]

OK ! I think I soved the issue ! With more attention I got identify corrrectly the position of nebula. THERE IS NO ERROR on my first photo. I did it very well. The amount of stars and different image scale of photos cause some confusiion. See, below:

 

I was right in 2012, I am righ in 2016, I got capture the nebula. And to finish this false issue...

A beautiful veiw of this nice target (that my camera will never will do with that resolution !)

from http://www.caelumobservatory.com/obs/m15.html

 

[ChrisLX200]

The Bayer Matrix of your camera will not be helping, with RGGB pattern then only one pixel of each Red and Blue is actually recording data (at the claimed resolution), the other three are interpolated. A mono CCD with colour filters would be better and, as I suggested, the use of an OIII filter to confirm a large change in relative brightness of the target. I agree the blue object is in the correct position according to the data I have seen but as mentioned elsewhere, the OIII makes positive identification much easier.

ChrisH

[jsmoraes]

I must agree with you ChrisH. The bayer matrix of DSLR "kill" the image. The stars are very large. Unhappily I haven't money to pay for a good mono camera. In my country, Brasil, we must pay 120 % as tax on the price of camera. For example:  US 1,000 will be US 2,200 and with cambio around 3.5 ... the final cost is 7,700 ... I earn only 2,000 to live during a month ... so an impossible dream !

Although ... I think that I can say... I did M 15 and Pease 1 ... and with a very modest set of equipments !

[ChrisLX200]

10 hours ago, jsmoraes said:

I must agree with you ChrisH. The bayer matrix of DSLR "kill" the image. The stars are very large. Unhappily I haven't money to pay for a good mono camera. In my country, Brasil, we must pay 120 % as tax on the price of camera. For example:  US 1,000 will be US 2,200 and with cambio around 3.5 ... the final cost is 7,700 ... I earn only 2,000 to live during a month ... so an impossible dream !

Although ... I think that I can say... I did M 15 and Pease 1 ... and with a very modest set of equipments !

You certainly have done that!  As a group we tend to forget that availability of kit is limited in some countries - and the best is naturally very expensive (everywhere, but more so in some places). Your image is a significant achievement under the circumstances so congrats on your efforts

ChrisH