M45, the punked version

[wimvb]

This was imaged from my dark site, so no LP filter needed.

35 x 7 minutes exposures + calibration frames. Pentax K20D with 135 mm lens (stopped down to f/5.6) @ ISO 400, on an EQ3 PRO mount, no guiding.

Despite some issues with my flats (a little dust left), and reverse blooming, this came out rather well.

I may even try to lift some of the faint dust surrounding the stars.

And the multiple spikes will be dealt with as well, next clear night.

[johnfosteruk]

Superb Wim, I think you should definitely try to lift the dust, it's definitely there, hinting that it wants to be seen.

[Dave In Vermont]

A very good take of M45, Wim! Thank you for sharing this Northerly nascent view of this celestial-jewel.

Enjoy!

Dave

[wimvb]

On 2017-01-04 at 01:45, johnfosteruk said:

Superb Wim, I think you should definitely try to lift the dust, it's definitely there, hinting that it wants to be seen.

Thanks, John.

On 2017-01-04 at 02:41, Dave In Vermont said:

A very good take of M45, Wim! Thank you for sharing this Northerly nascent view of this celestial-jewel.

Enjoy!

Dave

Thanks, Dave

I was about to upload a more severely stretched version, when I discovered some discrepancies. So, stay tuned.

 

[wxsatuser]

I can just see the 'claws', now if I had a dark sky like that.

[Pete Presland]

Quality Widefield view.

[wimvb]

4 hours ago, wxsatuser said:

I can just see the 'claws', now if I had a dark sky like that.

I managed to pull out one of them from under the noise, but not the other, yet. This was the discrepancy I was referring to in my previous post. As Arnie said "I will be back".

[wxsatuser]

1 hour ago, wimvb said:

I managed to pull out one of them from under the noise, but not the other, yet. This was the discrepancy I was referring to in my previous post. As Arnie said "I will be back".

I'm still having trouble getting them out of the DSW data, they are quite faint.

Paddy got them out ok in his widefield mosaic but I need a bit more skill.

[wimvb]

I pulled all I could. The result isn't pretty, but here it is: M45 with dust.

Considering what I started with after integration, this is definitely more than what should be pulled out of any image.

(integrated image with unlinked STF applied)

[wxsatuser]

Think you have done well to bring out what you have.

As a comparison, here is one where I went to far.
There is a lot of really faint stuff, I need a bit more skill to bring it out without blowing the whole image.

[wimvb]

Looks great!

Two ways that I have learned to bring out faint detail.

1. Use masked stretch as the first stretch to keep the stars under control

2. after most of the stretching is finished, try exponential transformation. This will lighten the background (use a mask to protect stars and bright nebulosity)

On an image that is already bright, like this one, you can also use gammastretch, which will selectively darken the background (again, use a mask to protect stars and bright nebulosity)

Cheers,

[michael.h.f.wilkinson]

Lovely M45 wide-field shot

[etunar]

nice one. I never knew there was so much detail around M45! Looks like a tricky one to process with all the subtle detail.

[laudropb]

Terrific widefield image.

[wimvb]

On 2017-01-08 at 12:00, michael.h.f.wilkinson said:

Lovely M45 wide-field shot

Thank you

On 2017-01-11 at 19:56, etunar said:

nice one. I never knew there was so much detail around M45! Looks like a tricky one to process with all the subtle detail.

Thank you. There is quite a lot of detail. The difficulty isn't so much enhancing the dust, as it is keeping the stars under control. The diffraction spikes around many bright stars are very easy to mess up. Next opportunity I get, I will reshoot this target without any spikes. I have a mask for this already.

2 hours ago, laudropb said:

Terrific widefield image.

Thank you

[etunar]

1 hour ago, wimvb said:

Thank you

Thank you. There is quite a lot of detail. The difficulty isn't so much enhancing the dust, as it is keeping the stars under control. The diffraction spikes around many bright stars are very easy to mess up. Next opportunity I get, I will reshoot this target without any spikes. I have a mask for this already.

Thank you

So I take it accurate star masks are a crucial step for processing any astro image?

[wimvb]

Yes. I don't know about processing in PS, but in PixInsight, good masks are crucial. Well worth spending time on.