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.

sgl_imaging_challenge_banner_inspirational_skies.thumb.jpg.a20cdbfeadc049807f6d78e6c00ee900.jpg

Allinthehead

Sh2-126 Ha Rgb

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

  • Like 27

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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

very nicely done, well worth the time on it.

Paul

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
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.

Share this post


Link to post
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

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
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

Share this post


Link to post
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

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well I like that a lot! Not an object I believe I've seen before, and very well done too!

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Really looks like a little minnow.  Nice work

Rodd

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
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.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Filroden said:

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.

Thanks Ken. It's always nice to see something new. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

well not a lot i can add its all been said but its a beaut image :thumbright:

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, toxic said:

well not a lot i can add its all been said but its a beaut image :thumbright:

Thanks for that Chris.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
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

Edited by ollypenrice

Share this post


Link to post
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.

Share this post


Link to post
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

Share this post


Link to post
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. 

Share this post


Link to post
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.

Share this post


Link to post
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.

Share this post


Link to post
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.

Share this post


Link to post
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.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.