M63: Full Data Set

[Rodd]

Based on the response to the M94 dat set, I thought some of you might want to have a go at my other ASI 1600 and TOA 130 data set.  The tenor of this post is a bit different however....I am somewhat pleased with the results I was able to get.  There is always room for improvement, but I found this target much easier to process than M94.  But--I still feel it is too much.  When I look at The newly combined RGB stacks, it seems more realistic.  In bringing out the details I somehow lose something.  A couple of things--calibration was poor for the Lum channel (I had issues with the flats).  You can see the dark patches that the flats missed.  I did not crop them out as I did not want to lose the FOV or change the image scale.  A larger than normal crop was required as it was due to poor framing on my part and I did not ant to make it worse.  The galaxy is unhindered though, and that's what the eye goes to anyway.  That is why the background may look a bit clipped--out of necessity.  Not too bad though.

Again, the number of subs are in the stack name.   I have included 2 of my latest versions--I can't tell which I prefer.  I am leaning toward #1, but I am also drawn to the details and sharpness of #2.  I have rotated my image to be 90 degrees from the acquisition angle.  At first I did not want to do this, but in the end I chose to do it.  On Astrobin it does not change the scale of the image--but on this forum I think it does--it makes the normal viewing a smaller scale, forcing one to use full resolution mode--which is not necessarily a good idea for my image--it tends to break down a bit.  I am sure versions that stand up better to full resolution will be posted here (I hope).

So, have a whirl if you choose, and have fun.  Edit--I posted a non rotated image as well just to demonstrate the scale issue

Rodd

r170.fit

g97.fit

b71.fit

l190.fit

Non rotated image #2.  Normal viewing is sufficient for non rotated versions, unlike the rotated ones.

[peter shah]

Despite your flat issues you have a super image there. I can even see the outer loop just starting to show no easy task.

[vlaiv]

Thanks for sharing your data, I've been thinking about completely new way of processing astronomical images, and since I've not got any of my data that is suitable at the moment (hopefully that will change as soon as there is new moon), I'll have a play with this set and see what I can come up with.

[Petergoodhew]

You've amazing details in M63 Rodd. Quite remarkable.  Yes your flats need fixing though.  I think I can see dark rings around the stars - which suggests you might need tighter star masking? Olly taught me a trick in Photoshop to fix that after the event - but with lots of stars to fix it could get tedious: using the clone stamp in lighten mode.

[wimvb]

Now you're starting to spoil us. 

Thanks for sharing the data, I'll download it later today.

[gorann]

Yes, thanks Rodd! Very nice of you to keep us data starved SGLers occupied. Your image look very promising and I will also download the data later today.

[Rodd]

3 hours ago, peter shah said:

Despite your flat issues you have a super image there. I can even see the outer loop just starting to show no easy task.

Thanks Peter.  I'm thinking allot more lum (properly calibrated).

Rodd

[Rodd]

2 hours ago, vlaiv said:

Thanks for sharing your data, I've been thinking about completely new way of processing astronomical images, and since I've not got any of my data that is suitable at the moment (hopefully that will change as soon as there is new moon), I'll have a play with this set and see what I can come up with.

I am looking forward to seeing it.  Sounds intriguing.

Rodd

[Rodd]

1 hour ago, Petergoodhew said:

You've amazing details in M63 Rodd. Quite remarkable.  Yes your flats need fixing though.  I think I can see dark rings around the stars - which suggests you might need tighter star masking? Olly taught me a trick in Photoshop to fix that after the event - but with lots of stars to fix it could get tedious: using the clone stamp in lighten mode.

Thanks Peter.  Yes, some of the stars in the galaxy have rings.  I don't see that with the stars in the background (though I did not closely inspect all of them)--its tough to get those stars in the galaxy in a star mask in PI.  In fact, getting perfectly fitting star masks is not an easy task.  I have improved with over time, but its difficult.  Usually you get overprotection (the star mask covering the star and a bit around the star).  Sometimes you want a little over protection though (when sharpening).  If I use MSMT I can get perfectly fitting stars--but not all of them (that's the problem).  I try to avoid using the clone stamp on an image (I use it on masks allot though).

Rodd

[Rodd]

1 hour ago, wimvb said:

Now you're starting to spoil us. 

Thanks for sharing the data, I'll download it later today.

Looking forward to seeing what you come up with.

Rodd

[Rodd]

17 minutes ago, gorann said:

Yes, thanks Rodd! Very nice of you to keep us data starved SGLers occupied. Your image look very promising and I will also download the data later today.

Thanks Gorann.  Looking forward to it.

Rodd

[wimvb]

PixInsighted

I still need to repair the bright stars.

[Rodd]

49 minutes ago, wimvb said:

still need to repair the bright stars

Looks great--I found it very difficult to get that yellowish tone in the center that you got so beautifully.  It took you an hour to do what I did in a month!--not even actually, as your image is superior.

Rodd

[whatablanker]

How much detail? Fantastic ???

[Rodd]

9 minutes ago, whatablanker said:

How much detail? Fantastic ???

Amazing what a 5" scope can do from an orange zone.  Imagine 17" of aperture at LePalma?  There is a company here--my supplier--OPT (Oceanside Photo and Telecope), that is partnering with a company to put 8" RCs in orbit for people to use.  The ultimate remote observatory.

Rodd

[Xiga]

17 hours ago, Rodd said:

Based on the response to the M94 dat set, I thought some of you might want to have a go at my other ASI 1600 and TOA 130 data set.  The tenor of this post is a bit different however....I am somewhat pleased with the results I was able to get.  There is always room for improvement, but I found this target much easier to process than M94.  But--I still feel it is too much.  When I look at The newly combined RGB stacks, it seems more realistic.  In bringing out the details I somehow lose something.  A couple of things--calibration was poor for the Lum channel (I had issues with the flats).  You can see the dark patches that the flats missed.  I did not crop them out as I did not want to lose the FOV or change the image scale.  A larger than normal crop was required as it was due to poor framing on my part and I did not ant to make it worse.  The galaxy is unhindered though, and that's what the eye goes to anyway.  That is why the background may look a bit clipped--out of necessity.  Not too bad though.

Again, the number of subs are in the stack name.   I have included 2 of my latest versions--I can't tell which I prefer.  I am leaning toward #1, but I am also drawn to the details and sharpness of #2.  I have rotated my image to be 90 degrees from the acquisition angle.  At first I did not want to do this, but in the end I chose to do it.  On Astrobin it does not change the scale of the image--but on this forum I think it does--it makes the normal viewing a smaller scale, forcing one to use full resolution mode--which is not necessarily a good idea for my image--it tends to break down a bit.  I am sure versions that stand up better to full resolution will be posted here (I hope).

So, have a whirl if you choose, and have fun.  Edit--I posted a non rotated image as well just to demonstrate the scale issue

Rodd

r170.fit

g97.fit

b71.fit

l190.fit

Non rotated image #2.  Normal viewing is sufficient for non rotated versions, unlike the rotated ones.

Thanks again Rodd for posting more Data (for those of us who are out of the game now for the next few months).

Quick question - did something go wrong with the Red Stack? A quick stretch of the Red channel .fit shows an overly bright image with a very strange dark border running across both sides. The stars seem to be in the right place though.

 

 

[wimvb]

Version 2. Tamed that bloating central star somewhat.

(click on the image to get to a larger version)

Btw, here are a few other interesting versions of this galaxy:

Gabany: http://www.cosmotography.com/images/small_ngc5055.html

Bryzgalov: https://www.flickr.com/photos/olegbr/31438368534

So, here's a Gabany rendering of your image, Rodd:

There's definitely a veeery weak structure, but unfortunately also a the remains of a dust bunny, trying to pose as a tidal tail.

[Rodd]

5 minutes ago, Xiga said:

Thanks again Rodd for posting more Data (for those of us who are out of the game now for the next few months).

Quick question - did something go wrong with the Red Stack? A quick stretch of the Red channel .fit shows an overly bright image with a very strange dark border running across both sides. The stars seem to be in the right place though.

 

 

Yes--I screwed up the framing--That is why the image needs to be cropped so much, even if the flats all worked well.

[Rodd]

5 minutes ago, wimvb said:

here's definitely a veeery weak structure, but unfortunately also a the remains of a dust bunny, trying to pose as a tidal tail.

Which tidal tail is the poser?

[wimvb]

4 minutes ago, Rodd said:

Which tidal tail is the poser?

[Rodd]

36 minutes ago, wimvb said:

At least you can't see it in the image.  Its all because of the lum--for some reason the flats just did not work.  I will take new lum and new flats and see if I can get them to produce a clean lum stack.  

Rodd

[wimvb]

If a dust bunny in a stacked image looks "embossed", it moved sometime between light exposures and flat exposures. Since it's a large and faint bunny, and only on the L, it's probably on the Luminance filter. But if you can see it on colour frames, you could try using one of the colour flats to correct the luminance frames.

I think that you could try to get more of the halo and tidal stream if you have the possibility to increase the total integration time for luminance.

(As a reference: Gabany spent 7 hours on L alone with a 0.5 m photon bucket, while Bryzgalov had an integration time of 20+ hours. The stream is Weak.)

[Rodd]

26 minutes ago, wimvb said:

If a dust bunny in a stacked image looks "embossed", it moved sometime between light exposures and flat exposures. Since it's a large and faint bunny, and only on the L, it's probably on the Luminance filter. But if you can see it on colour frames, you could try using one of the colour flats to correct the luminance frames.

I think that you could try to get more of the halo and tidal stream if you have the possibility to increase the total integration time for luminance.

(As a reference: Gabany spent 7 hours on L alone with a 0.5 m photon bucket, while Bryzgalov had an integration time of 20+ hours. The stream is Weak.)

Yes--I think redoing the lum would be a good idea--the problem, now that I think about it, is I have rotated my camera since shooting this image.  And despite having a camera angle adjuster, I can never find the exact same angle when I take the camera oof for some reason (or rotate it).  The more I am off--the more cropping will be required.   If I move the camera now--I ruin the M106 I am currently working on.  I have never understood why I can't find the same camera angle.  But I will line up a star and other stars will be misaligned--but what is strange is the stars in the right will be off a different direction than the stars to the left--like the star I aligned is the center if a rotation.  But no matter how I rotate the  camera--the stars just don't line up--some move closer while others move apart.  I guess if I get it close for this image it will be ok, as the galaxy is all that really matters and it is near the center.  If I have to crop an inch I can always downsize a bit to compensate.  

I guess I should learn how to plate solve in Maxim so I can find the exact FOV.  

[Xiga]

Here's my effort:

 

[Rodd]

1 hour ago, Xiga said:

Here's my effort:

Nice Ciaran.  Wonderful palette--something I struggled with.  If you drop the brightness of the core (increase contrast) a bit, you will pick up the inner dust lanes very clearly.  That is a very clean image--not pushed too hard.

Rodd