Jump to content

Stargazers Lounge Uses Cookies

Like most websites, SGL uses cookies in order to deliver a secure, personalised service, to provide social media functions and to analyse our traffic. Continued use of SGL indicates your acceptance of our cookie policy.

  • Announcements

    sgl_imaging_challenge_banner_lunar.thumb.jpg.ef4882eb5fb3610f8a68e5e6913de0e3.jpg

Recommended Posts

SvartSork    96

Seeing was actually quite good this particular night so decided to image my favourite galaxy M51.
Here are the acquisition details:

Date: 2017-05-02
Mount: EQ5 Pro
Scope: SkyWatcher 130 PDS
Camera: ASI 290MM (from FLO earlier this year - love it!!!)
Lights: 553x8s
Darks: 173x8s
Gain: 400
Binning: None

 

Post processing was done in DSS and then GIMP. Also used an application I wrote myself to remove the background gradients and ampglow. It is similar to how DBE works in pixinsight but less advanced of course. I have a thread over here about it (sorry in swedish): http://astronet.se/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=13&t=14890

I can upload a ZIP of the raw files if anyone would like to try out some short exposure image processing :happy7:

Also have an image over in the huge 130PDS thread that uses these subs along with some from april (so can't use that image here...). It does look better with less noise.

M51_553subs_proc4.jpg

  • Like 16

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Galen Gilmore    458

That is an amazing image for such short exposure times! 

is there a reason your using such short exposure times? Because I'm getting the same equipment you have, an EQ5 and a 130PDS.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
cuivenion    486

Fantastic image. I thought that images like this were only possiblle with much larger apertures when using such short exposure times.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
SvartSork    96
1 hour ago, Galen Gilmore said:

That is an amazing image for such short exposure times! 

is there a reason your using such short exposure times? Because I'm getting the same equipment you have, an EQ5 and a 130PDS.

Thanks a lot!

The reason for short exposures is that it makes everything so much easier and less expensive. Since these new CMOS cameras have so low read noise there is no need for long exposures that is required with most CCD cameras. Long exposures either requires guiding (which is a pain in every possible way not to mention an extra expense) or a mount that costs a lot of £££. You could even use an Alt-Az motorised mount to do short exposures :icon_biggrin:

Another good thing is that it has made it possible for me to image even on nights with windy weather. Sure, I have to throw away a couple of subs those nights but imagine the pain of trying 5 minute exposures and have them ruined by a gust at the last second, NOT fun!!

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
SvartSork    96
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, cuivenion said:

Fantastic image. I thought that images like this were only possiblle with much larger apertures when using such short exposure times.

Thanks! Yes, I was skeptical as well, but truth is I have had so much fun ever since I got this camera :)

I did at lot of testing in the beginning, more information in this forum thread (sorry swedish again): http://astronet.se/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=15&t=14495

 

Edited by SvartSork
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
AKB    473
5 hours ago, SvartSork said:

I can upload a ZIP of the raw files if anyone would like to try out some short exposure image processing

Oooh yes, please!  Would like to compare my gradient removal with yours!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
SvartSork    96

@AKB ok will do. Just that it will be several GB in size so need to find somewhere else to upload it  :(

I'd say that is the main drawback of short exposures - you need a lot of disk space and patience while stacking.. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
AKB    473

Thanks. In fact, just to compare gradient removal, I guess the raw stack would be a start (you don't remove the background on each sub separately, I assume.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Ant    3,428

 That's incredible!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
SvartSork    96
10 hours ago, AKB said:

Thanks. In fact, just to compare gradient removal, I guess the raw stack would be a start (you don't remove the background on each sub separately, I assume.)

Here is the full set of lights and darks if you are still interested (or someone else is). It is 2 GB compressed :icon_biggrin:
I used 553 of the lights subs but there are some hundred more in the ZIP file. Just pick the ones with best FWHM and score and you should have roughly the same set as I used in DSS.

https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/26920912/SGL_M51.zip

 

41 minutes ago, Ant said:

 That's incredible!

Thanks!

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
AKB    473
Posted (edited)

Well, here's my attempt using 262 subs.  It's only that number because it became rather tedious to manually pick the alignment stars for each sub... there seems to be quite a bit of movement between each.  You don't dither?

Also, this camera is not cooled??  Amazing data!

I may have stretched it just a bit too far, but you can clearly see some small fuzzies in the background – not sure of their actual designation.

Basic processing chain was:

Nebulosity:

  • Grade image quality, picking those with HFR below 2.25
  • Align, simple translation with manual star selection (rejected just one with satellite trail)
  • Stack

Matlab:

  • Background removal (homemade, fully automatic with no manual placement – perhaps like ABE??)
  • Stretching (mixture of automatic and manual)
  • Noise reduction - weak bilateral filter and ONR ('Olly Noise Reduction' – raise lowest end of curve)

Nebulosity (again):

  • Slight star reduction
  • Image rotation
  • JPG generation

So, really, very similar to usual processing, just that there are a lot more files!

Thanks so much for letting us have a play with this.

M51_262subs_akb.thumb.jpg.acf263ce432cc0f878e07d532f1bed94.jpg

Edited by AKB
forgot to add ONR in processing (how could I?)
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
AKB    473

Sorry!  Just realised that this is a competition entry thread... probably shouldn't have posted here.  Apologies.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
sharkmelley    970

8sec exposures!   It's a lovely image and an excellent example of how sensors with low read noise are changing the rules of the game :)

Mark

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
SvartSork    96
On 2017-07-12 at 02:21, sharkmelley said:

8sec exposures!   It's a lovely image and an excellent example of how sensors with low read noise are changing the rules of the game :)

Thanks Mark!

I have another version with almost double number of subs that looks much better:

Cant use it though since half of the subs are from april :(

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • Similar Content

    • By Red Dwarfer
      Hi all , 
      Is anyone else having trouble finding or observing M51 Whirlpool Galaxy near Ursa Major ? I tried to find it for the first time last night but gave up after ten minutes ... then tonight I thought I'd give it another try , this time first with binoculars , and relatively quickly found what looked like a faint fuzz in that general area . When I located it with the 200P at x 75 magnification ( 32mm and x 2 Barlow ) l could just make out two faint but distinct blobs , the main light core of the Galaxy and the light core of the tail as well but both were quite faint in this lighter region of the N/W Summer sky , compared to M57 in Hercules for example . Is M51 best left as a Winter target or is it just better observed with a bigger scope ? 
    • By alan4908
       In 2017 I went through a major upgrade of my imaging equipment and moved from a SW NEQ6/SW ED 80 to a SW Esprit 150/10micron GM1000HPS combination. In the course of testing my new mount in unguided mode I took some M51 Lum test shots at 600 and 1800s with the Esprit 150. Rather than waste this data I decided to see if I could use it to try to improve an Ha + LRGB image that I had acquired in 2016 with my NEQ6/ED 80 combination.
      Since I've never tried to blend data from two difference telescopes, I decided to take the lower resolution post processed Ha + LRGB image and to treat it as "RGB" data (this image can be seen in my gallery Deep Sky II M51 reprocessed).  I then took the higher resolution Lum data that I had acquired with the Esprit 150 and used this as a Luminosity layer within PS (I aligned the Lum and "RGB" data via Registar). After a little processing in Pixinsight and PS I got the above result.  
    • By alan4908
      I decided to attempt to enhance my M51 image taken with my SW 80 ED/NEQ6 last year with some Luminescence data that I had acquired through some unguided test shots with my new SW Esprit 150/10micron GM1000HPS combination.
      Since I've never tried to combine data from two difference scopes, I decided to simply overlay the post processed result of my previous attempt with the new luminescence data and aligned the images via Registar.  After a bit of processing in PS and Pixinsight I got the result below. The image represents just over 9 hours integration time.
       

       
      Alan
      LIGHTS ED 80: L:11,R:10,G:9,B:8 x 600s. Ha: 2 x 1200s. LIGHTS Esprit 150: L:5 x 600s, 2x1800s.  DARKS: 30; BIAS:100; FLATS:40
    • By Davide Simonetti
      Wow, what a difference a dark sky and a fast scope makes! It's been a while since I last imaged this galaxy and this time I tried it using the 150mm Newtonian on its first outing to a place with much darker skies than murky north London where I usually operate from. This shot was done from Kelvedon Common in Essex and the difference between this and my earlier attempts is incredible - I could see from the first sub that this was going to be a vast improvement. Once it was stacked it needed very little processing. I wish more than ever to move out of the city now 
      20 x 120 second exposures at 400 ISO (58 minutes integration time).
      12 x dark frames
      79 x flat frames
      21 x bias/offset frames (subtracted from flat frames only)
      Captured with APT
      Guided with PHD2
      Processed in Nebulosity and Photoshop 
      Equipment:
      Sky-Watcher Explorer-150PDS
      Skywatcher EQ5 Mount
      Orion 50mm Mini Guide Scope
      ZWO ASI120 MC imaging and guiding camera
      Canon 700D DSLR

    • By Yearofthegoat
      I'm reasonably pleased with this but there's lots to improve. Needs to be less noisy for one.
      Unguided Canon 50D, 20x43s subs 5xdarks, ISO800, used DSS and Photoshop CS3. Thanks to @carastro for her guide - it was very useful indeed.

×