M22 Globular Cluster

[Tom OD 1,025]

Happy Christmas SGL,

I m finally getting around to processing images from this year, and this is the last TEC image.

Olly already posted his version about 5 months ago

This is 7 hours of LRGB, in Sagittarius. There is virtually no background sky in this region, being so close to the centre of the Milky Way. What you do get though is a super field of Red / Orange / Golden stars, in what I believe is a dusty region of the sky.

Comparing this TEC data to the two panels of the FSQ data that have M22 in it from my Galactic Centre mosaic, I see that I have the same darker regions in all three images. Perhaps there is a Ha signal lurking in there.  

Attaching a cropped version at 100% also.

Tom

 

[ollypenrice 29,315]

Insanely starry! And nicely summery in this chilly season...

Olly

[laudropb 7,377]

Lovely image.

[gnomus 2,844]

Hi Tom.  Can you tell me exactly how many stars there are in this image (I assume you have counted them all)?

[ChrisLX200 3,599]

A case of a globular cluster 'hiding in plain sight'? All finely resolved Tom, and colours are spot on!

ChrisH

[Tom OD 1,025]

1 hour ago, gnomus said:

Hi Tom.  Can you tell me exactly how many stars there are in this image (I assume you have counted them all)?

I did know but then I forgot the number as I cropped the image a little bit ?

This cluster is bigger and brighter than M13. I guess M22 is considered a Southern sky object, as I always thought M13 was regarded the biggest and brightest in the Northern hemisphere. 

T. 

[ollypenrice 29,315]

6 minutes ago, Tom OD said:

I did know but then I forgot the number as I cropped the image a little bit ?

This cluster is bigger and brighter than M13. I guess M22 is considered a Southern sky object, as I always thought M13 was regarded the biggest and brightest in the Northern hemisphere. 

T. 

Skymap Pro gives it a slightly lower V mag than M13 (5.2 against 5.8) but it's a good bit larger at 30 arcmins against 20. This was a real surprise. It doesn't seem as striking in the Dob but, of course, M13 rides over the zenith whereas M22 stays low. That must be it.

Olly

[Mr Spock 7,514]

Gosh that's full of stars! Just lovely.

[Tom OD 1,025]

39 minutes ago, ollypenrice said:

Skymap Pro gives it a slightly lower V mag than M13 (5.2 against 5.8) but it's a good bit larger at 30 arcmins against 20. This was a real surprise. It doesn't seem as striking in the Dob but, of course, M13 rides over the zenith whereas M22 stays low. That must be it.

Olly

Riding on the zenith will make a huge difference for this in a scope. Must look up the Wild Duck cluster now for comparison. That always looked super in the 20" Dob. I tried to plate solve it to count the stars, out of curiosity but it keeps failing

[ollypenrice 29,315]

4 hours ago, Tom OD said:

Riding on the zenith will make a huge difference for this in a scope. Must look up the Wild Duck cluster now for comparison. That always looked super in the 20" Dob. I tried to plate solve it to count the stars, out of curiosity but it keeps failing

I have some Wild Duck data from the TEC. I'll send it along if you don't have it already.

Olly

[PatrickGilliland 2,056]

Nice work Tom, to quote the picture from your logo pic is far too obvious but would fit well!  

This has worked very well, in such a rich field of stars would have been all to easy to lose the feel of the cluster but it still maintains a depth to it which the close up demonstrates perfectly.  Colours are nice and warm but not overdone so nice work all round.

Paddy

[Tom OD 1,025]

15 minutes ago, PatrickGilliland said:

Nice work Tom, to quote the picture from your logo pic is far too obvious but would fit well!  

This has worked very well, in such a rich field of stars would have been all to easy to lose the feel of the cluster but it still maintains a depth to it which the close up demonstrates perfectly.  Colours are nice and warm but not overdone so nice work all round.

Paddy

Cheers Patrick. 

I always try to keep it subtle. There are times when you just want to punch it to far though, but I always hold back  

Tom 

[PatrickGilliland 2,056]

Just now, Tom OD said:

Cheers Patrick. 

I always try to keep it subtle. There are times when you just want to punch it to far though, but I always hold back  

Tom 

Therein lies the art, finding that balance provides a longer term punch,  hmm, no not punch, its aesthetic appeal.  You can go all Hollywood on it and first look is wow then within 15 seconds it starts to break down - the subtle approach with the detail and finesse provides a long term aesthetic draw.  It's what not only keeps the attention but also brings people back for a second look.  

Stick with that style as it's a skill I am learning the hard way  

Paddy 

[Tom OD 1,025]

10 hours ago, PatrickGilliland said:

Therein lies the art, finding that balance provides a longer term punch,  hmm, no not punch, its aesthetic appeal.  You can go all Hollywood on it and first look is wow then within 15 seconds it starts to break down - the subtle approach with the detail and finesse provides a long term aesthetic draw.  It's what not only keeps the attention but also brings people back for a second look.  

Stick with that style as it's a skill I am learning the hard way  

Paddy 

You re right Paddy, and that's how I can recognise peoples images. I know an Olly image from a mile off, not because I knew he was imaging it but by his style. For example I know a Peter Shah image, and many, many others from the way / style they produce the images.

Love the "go all Hollywood on it" bit

Tom

[PatrickGilliland 2,056]

6 hours ago, Tom OD said:

You re right Paddy, and that's how I can recognise peoples images. I know an Olly image from a mile off, not because I knew he was imaging it but by his style. For example I know a Peter Shah image, and many, many others from the way / style they produce the images.

Love the "go all Hollywood on it" bit

Tom

Well it's how I review my images from a year ago, I am more guilty than most  of 'Hollywood with no Oscars' (and rightly so! Hopefully getting closer to the mark and my style is a little harder to nail down as been refining (a lot) of late  Not sure if that makes me 'improving' or just indecisive!!

Paddy  

[sharkmelley 1,164]

I really love that image - it is faultless.  The almost uniform background of stars is quite breathtaking.

Mark

[Barry-Wilson 2,968]

Excellent control of the multitude of stars without being obvious and detracting.  Superb image Tom.

[Tom OD 1,025]

On 23/12/2016 at 12:18, sharkmelley said:

I really love that image - it is faultless.  The almost uniform background of stars is quite breathtaking.

Mark

 

On 23/12/2016 at 14:36, Barry-Wilson said:

Excellent control of the multitude of stars without being obvious and detracting.  Superb image Tom.

Thanks very much guys. Delighted you enjoy the pic. 

Tom.