Jump to content

SkySurveyBanner.jpg.21855908fce40597655603b6c9af720d.jpg

Sh2-126 Ha Rgb


Allinthehead

Recommended Posts

Good evening all. Following on from my ha version of this i'm finally done with this data. This is sh2-126 in Lacerta. If you locate Andromeda and trace a line towards Deneb it's about half way. This is a large star forming region approx 1200 light years from earth. The source of it's ionisation is the intense ultraviolet radiation of the star 10 Lacertae, a blue main sequence star. ( from the interwebby )

I collected 12 hrs of ha, 4.5 red, 3 blue, 3 green and 7 hrs of lum. Combined 29.5 hrs. By far the most data i've collected on any one object. It probably needs a bit more owing to my having to shoot through a blanket of light pollution from local street lights. 

The Ha was gain 300 for 150 seconds. The Lrgb was unity gain for 150 seconds. Sensor cooled to -20. Processed in PS. Stacked in DSS.

I couldn't decide which orientation i liked better so i thought i'd post them both.

Thanks to everyone who gave advice on my thread about combining luminance with rgb. I was going nowhere fast on my own. Olly's method was the one i went with. Combining it in small amounts. Otherwise it just washed out the colour.

Anyway i hope you like it.

Richard.

59cd3dd543c24_Sh2126finalcrop.thumb.png.0e62d6e109ea9458f3de6b4272d1e919.png

59cd3def7ab97_sh2126final.thumb.png.926f78749256eb840bacccc3c063bcef.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 54
  • Created
  • Last Reply
43 minutes ago, ultranova said:

That's lovely, first time I have ever seen this one

very nicely done, well worth the time on it.

Paul

Thanks Paul and a lot of time it was. Collecting that much data in Ireland is no easy task. I think it was 7 nights all in.

 

22 minutes ago, moise212 said:

Very nice in all aspects! Ha looks good, lum looks good, colours look good, stars look good. How wide was the lens opened?

Thanks Alex. Lens was wide open.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I love this object (or rather, pair of objects.) I can't think of any other Ha object so large, smooth and featureless on small scales while having so distinctive a large scale structure. The dusty 'flying fish' sets it off perfectly.

Superb.

Olly

Link to comment
Share on other sites

34 minutes ago, ollypenrice said:

I love this object (or rather, pair of objects.) I can't think of any other Ha object so large, smooth and featureless on small scales while having so distinctive a large scale structure. The dusty 'flying fish' sets it off perfectly.

Superb.

Olly

Thanks Olly .Yes as soon as i saw this on Dso browser i was interested. The "Flying fish" would make a nice target at a longer focal length, also the nebulosity lower left is quite interesting. 

59ce06cd75efb_sh2126finalcropneb.thumb.png.edc45b68d26d72f93ed8f319f607bf25.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Allinthehead said:

Thanks Olly .Yes as soon as i saw this on Dso browser i was interested. The "Flying fish" would make a nice target at a longer focal length, also the nebulosity lower left is quite interesting. 

59ce06cd75efb_sh2126finalcropneb.thumb.png.edc45b68d26d72f93ed8f319f607bf25.png

Agreed. I met this thanks to Maurice Toet who was imaging it on one of his visits. It was irrestible but still consumed 24 hours (as a two panel) from our dark site. You have to be up for it but it's really worth it.

Olly

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, Allinthehead said:

I've had no feedback on which orientation is more pleasing. Have you a preference?

Lovely image and another one I've not seen before. How can the universe be so big :) Of the two orientations, I slightly prefer the second but they both work well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On the framing, it's often said that the top right draws the eye. I tend not to like fixed ideas on things like this but, none the less, I think this one has merit so I prefer the second orientation. That dusty umbilical brings us down into the image, if you like.

Olly

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As everyone has said, a very very nice image of a rarely imaged object!

Maybe you could try to reduce the stars a bit more to make the nebula stand out even better. You could use Noel's actions in PS if you have that. Worth a try to see how it looks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, gorann said:

As everyone has said, a very very nice image of a rarely imaged object!

Maybe you could try to reduce the stars a bit more to make the nebula stand out even better. You could use Noel's actions in PS if you have that. Worth a try to see how it looks.

Hi Gorann. Thanks for the feedback. I did give it one dose of Noel's actions reduce stars, i do find giving it any more introduces a strange artifact when zoomed in.

59d0ac1fe4c5b_sh2rducestars.thumb.jpg.000b46a01c428ee06e3f964916155a73.jpg

59d0ac20ec156_sh2croprducestars.jpg.a8f61e0725b4349f9c83e34f9ebf630e.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, ollypenrice said:

On the framing, it's often said that the top right draws the eye. I tend not to like fixed ideas on things like this but, none the less, I think this one has merit so I prefer the second orientation. That dusty umbilical brings us down into the image, if you like.

Olly

I think i agree. The reason i like the other orientation was the way it gave a sense of depth in the ha from bottom left at the forefront stretching back deeper towards the top right. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes, I know that artifact. It somehow joins stars that are close together with a cord. Does the large image you now posted have one round of star shrinking or do you mean that you had done that to your original post? I think that in your case the artifact is quite subtle and only noticeable after some serious pixel peeping. So, it is a tough decision since the star shrinking helps bringing out the nebula quite a bit. I like the version you now posted.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Great image. Never seen this before.

Framing: I like the tighter crop of nr 1 with the orientation of nr 2. So, what about image 1 rotated to have the same orientation as nr 2?

Star reduction (you probably already know this, but anyway): PixInsight morphological transform with a good, albeit soft, contour star mask. Try morph selection at 0.25, amount 0.4, iterations about 4, 3x3 element. In images where the standard contour mask doesn't work, I make 2 different ordinary star masks which I then subtract in Pixelmath. This guarantees contours around all stars.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

52 minutes ago, gorann said:

Yes, I know that artifact. It somehow joins stars that are close together with a cord. Does the large image you now posted have one round of star shrinking or do you mean that you had done that to your original post? I think that in your case the artifact is quite subtle and only noticeable after some serious pixel peeping. So, it is a tough decision since the star shrinking helps bringing out the nebula quite a bit. I like the version you now posted.

I had done one round of star reduction on the original. The last version i posted has a further 2 rounds to show the artifact. I tried again with just 2 rounds in total and you can just see the artifact starting to creep in.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, wimvb said:

Great image. Never seen this before.

Framing: I like the tighter crop of nr 1 with the orientation of nr 2. So, what about image 1 rotated to have the same orientation as nr 2?

Star reduction (you probably already know this, but anyway): PixInsight morphological transform with a good, albeit soft, contour star mask. Try morph selection at 0.25, amount 0.4, iterations about 4, 3x3 element. In images where the standard contour mask doesn't work, I make 2 different ordinary star masks which I then subtract in Pixelmath. This guarantees contours around all stars.

Thanks for the comment and feedback. I didn't know that about pixinsight. At the moment i'm just learning the basics with it. I use it for DBE and SCNR and that's it, everything else is done in DSS and PS as that's what i'm used to.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue. By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.