Co-Op CTB1

[Uranium235]

Its been a week or so since I processed this, but moving house sort of interrupted that slightly. But now im (sort of) settled I can post the lastest effort on CTB1 with the help of @sloz1664 (Steve) we managed to put together 36x1800 between us - which worked out nicely because we have exactly the same gear. The processing, as ever was still challenging - a lot of the time spent trying to keep the stars down on such a big stretch of the data.

Still, it turned out alright. Still needs more time, but that wont be happening til next autumn/winter season. Here is my version of it, using screen mask invert technique to try and keep the stars small.

 

36x1800 (Ha)

Star71, NEQ6, Atik 383L+ (x2)

Thanks for looking

[MikeODay]

Lovely image with heaps of subtle detail and great tonal range across the image; from the background to the centres of the stars.  Well done.

[michael.h.f.wilkinson]

Very very nice!

[swag72]

This is great!! I've got a similar fov I think in Ha from data about 4 years ago if you are interested in adding some more? There's 20 hours or so if you want some more  Ha data ??

[Tom OD]

cool. The middle bubble looks like a flattened Seimis 147.

Tom

[sloz1664]

Nice one Rob. Your processing skills far outweigh my own. Now I've retired I'm getting my head round to honing my processing skills. Although swmbo has a vast array of projects for me to undertake, which throws my processing education towards the back burner 

Steve

[Uranium235]

10 hours ago, swag72 said:

This is great!! I've got a similar fov I think in Ha from data about 4 years ago if you are interested in adding some more? There's 20 hours or so if you want some more  Ha data ??

Thanks for the offer Sara Im not sure how I would be able to integrate (via stacking) data from a completely different setup, as the pixel scales arent a close match. I can do it via blend mode lighten or normal like I do when blending in stuff from a longer focal length, but thats not quite the same as summing the data with stacking (its more of an overwrite).

[swag72]

1 minute ago, Uranium235 said:

Thanks for the offer Sara Im not sure how I would be able to integrate (via stacking) data from a completely different setup, as the pixel scales arent a close match. I can do it via blend mode lighten or normal like I do when blending in stuff from a longer focal length, but thats not quite the same as summing the data with stacking (its more of an overwrite).

The offer is there should you wish ? I think that in APP you'd be able to register then integrate the different stacks and hey presto....... 

[Barry-Wilson]

Glorious Rob.

[Uranium235]

14 hours ago, swag72 said:

The offer is there should you wish ? I think that in APP you'd be able to register then integrate the different stacks and hey presto....... 

Hmmmm.... interesting! I must take a more serious look at APP then!

[alexbb]

You can also register another stack, blend it with another one with different weights and still increase the SNR. Blending manually I mean, like stacking 2 subs.
You can do this with APP, indeed and APP will give you several options of automatically weighting the stacks.

Nice image, by the way

[Uranium235]

10 hours ago, moise212 said:

You can also register another stack, blend it with another one with different weights and still increase the SNR. Blending manually I mean, like stacking 2 subs.
You can do this with APP, indeed and APP will give you several options of automatically weighting the stacks.

Nice image, by the way

I looked at the cost of APP earlier... 150 quid (sharp intake of breath!). Under normal circumstances I would... but at the moment its a bit far off since Ive just brought a house and im having to pay for all the other gubbins that goes with it (carpets etc...). Maybe in a few months I'll be able to afford it.

Just having my first session from the new location, going alright now as well. Quite a bit darker than where I came from as its right on the edge of town (just farmland for miles across the road), with the bonus that some of the street lighting is switched off at midnight.... plus its all old style sodium - bar one light... which I dont think really is an LED as its not "white" enough... my guess is its a mercury or metal halide lamp.

[alexbb]

37 minutes ago, Uranium235 said:

I looked at the cost of APP earlier... 150 quid (sharp intake of breath!). Under normal circumstances I would... but at the moment its a bit far off since Ive just brought a house and im having to pay for all the other gubbins that goes with it (carpets etc...). Maybe in a few months I'll be able to afford it.

Just having my first session from the new location, going alright now as well. Quite a bit darker than where I came from as its right on the edge of town (just farmland for miles across the road), with the bonus that some of the street lighting is switched off at midnight.... plus its all old style sodium - bar one light... which I dont think really is an LED as its not "white" enough... my guess is its a mercury or metal halide lamp.

Yeah, just for this, I would think a while if it's worth it. However, you already have Registar. You can compute how much aperture Sara showed to this area and for how long and you can then calculate the ratio of your total aperture/time compared to her's. You can merge those 2 stacks in Registar with the appropriate weights or manually the aligned stacks in PS or other software you like.