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_lunar_close-ups_winners.thumb.jpg.b5fb18580607a749e382266fe55a02a1.jpg

moise212

Rosette one year later

Recommended Posts

Almost one year later, I did the same. I went for Orion and I spared some time for the Rosette too. Last year's is 3h Ha, 3h OIII with a Tair 3s, very poor conditions, while this year's is 2h Ha and 50min OIII with an Esprit 80, a bit better conditions.

I still want to shoot a few more hours this season and some RGB for stars too, hopefully, before it hides beyond the house. I could have waited to gather all the data, sorry for being too impatient.

I also have made animation to show the improvements.

Clear skies!

Alex

NGC2237-F300-2017-01-02-Ha-F300-2017-01-30-O3_p01.thumb.jpg.561284a0408ecbc558ef6375a31b7243.jpg
NGC2237-F400-panel2-2018-02-04-HOO-half_p03.thumb.jpg.91871c2605c22fec62427c09365a2585.jpg
NGC2237-animation.thumb.gif.11c99f35a13046f99fbbb3d6ce8e34a5.gif

  • Like 11

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Stunning, Thank you for sharing,

a lot more detail in your re-visit, 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You have a much better-balanced background in image no. 2 which has revealed a huge amount of dust and gas lost to the background in the first image. Excellent progress for 12 months I'd say!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you, Jem, John!

About the background, there's still something wrong on the bottom-right corner, but anyways, I didn't have flats when I first processed the image. When clear, the sky has been good lately. I barely have any gradients after taking flats.

I really hope to be able to add more data to it and then process it a bit more seriously.

I'm more amazed by the amount of signal I recorded this year with an 80mm aperture in less than half of the time I recorded last year with a 66mm aperture. I suppose that the sky conditions are more than slightly better.

Clear skies!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

While I agree with John regarding the background of #2....I feel the nebula itself is quite bright in #2---contrast is lacking due to this.  There are more details in #2, but they are washed out due to the signal strength.  The same thing often  happens with M51.  Note that the bok globules are more easily seen in image #1 due to contrast, even though they may not possess as much detail as #2.  Try bringing down the brightness with curves at bit and #2 will truly be revealed.

Rodd 

Edited by Rodd

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, great progress!

But I agree with Rood. The new image is a bit blinding in its brightness. I would expect that working a bit with the curves to bring the brightest parts down would help and increase contrast.

Cheers

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you, guys!

How about this one? Just a quick jpeg adjusting. I need to get a few more hours so I can apply deconvolution and sharpening to the image without recurring to too many hacks to keep the noise down. And, however, this is half resolution, it really needs more than 3 hours.

NGC2237-F400-panel2-2018-02-04-HOO-half_p04.jpg

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Great image with much more faint detail and tiny stars.  Well done.

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, moise212 said:

Thank you, guys!

How about this one? Just a quick jpeg adjusting. I need to get a few more hours so I can apply deconvolution and sharpening to the image without recurring to too many hacks to keep the noise down. And, however, this is half resolution, it really needs more than 3 hours.

NGC2237-F400-panel2-2018-02-04-HOO-half_p04.jpg

Still a bit too bright centrally for me - I get the feeling that the brightness overwhelms all the nice detail you captured there. The data is clearly amazing. Just to explain what I mean I had a quick go at it with PS using just the contrast /brightness slider (a rather crude tool - can probably be done better with curves) selectively on the central parts (using layer masks and the brush tool) keeping the sky the same.

NGC2237-F400-panel2-2018-02-04-HOO-half_p04GN.jpg

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Gotcha. You should be able to achieve this without the manual brush by duplicating the layer, adding a layer mask (grayscale image of the layer) to the top layer, increase the brightness of the mask then blur it heavily (or blur then increase the brightness), then increase the contrast on the top layer. This will then apply only to the bright areas and surroundings (depending on the blur size).

NGC2237-F400-panel2-2018-02-04-HOO-half_p05.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

With some clear patches this evening I managed to record 30 more minutes of oxygen emitted photons to the left side of the above. For a total of 3h + 2h of Ha and 30min + 50min of O3, left + right panels:

NGC2237-F400-2018-02-12-HOO-p03-half.thumb.jpg.57aa49721fafee4ff2ec82d0f2288d5a.jpg

I really hope to get more data, at least RGB stars, but I'm afraid this won't be possible this season from my place.

Clear skies!

Alex

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Very nice. I wonder how much of the improvement is down improved processing skills?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks, Tim!

I'd say that half is due to better sky conditions and better scope and half due to better processing

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, very nice indeed - I really like the wide-screen framing. It reminds me of an image Olly @ollypenriceposted in January.

When I look at it with that "neck" sticking out to the left it makes me think of a marine worm of the genus Glycera (but then I am a biologist.....). It is quite a nasty thing that can inflict painful bites - very much an alien type of creature.

 

Glycera5GN2.jpg

Edited by gorann
  • Haha 2
  • Confused 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, gorann said:

Glycera 5GN.jpg

That's gross. :icon_puke_l:

Almost as bad as an afocal smartphone image........:angel4:

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks, Goran!

Which "neck" do you refer to ? The one in the middle of the frame?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, moise212 said:

Thanks, Goran!

Which "neck" do you refer to ? The one in the middle of the frame?

This one:

NGC2237-F400-2018-02-12-HOO-p03-halfDrawingsSmall.jpg

  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh, I see, I would have never seen it like this, but now it makes sense :alien:

  • Thanks 1

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.