Messier 31

[Ceph]

M31 I captured last autumn, even though I only have FL 420mm it seems like it still don't fully fits in the image.

Astro Tech AT 65Q

Canon700D Baader mod

5x120, 33x360 at ISO 800

Hope you likes it

[michael.h.f.wilkinson]

Very nice result, lots of detail showing and very nice colour. I have been using a 200mm F/2.8 telephoto for this target, and then it fits comfortably, but you don't get your level of detail.

I hope to try my 80mm F/6 with 0.8x reducer on it coming fall. This gives 384 mm focal length which should fit the galaxy a bit more easily in the FOV than 420 mm does

 

[bluegoatwoods]

Nice! To both of you.

To paraphrase Sam Gamgee, "Well if I could take pictures like that.....then I'd call myself an astronomer!"

[Ceph]

21 hours ago, michael.h.f.wilkinson said:

Very nice result, lots of detail showing and very nice colour. I have been using a 200mm F/2.8 telephoto for this target, and then it fits comfortably, but you don't get your level of detail.

 

I hope to try my 80mm F/6 with 0.8x reducer on it coming fall. This gives 384 mm focal length which should fit the galaxy a bit more easily in the FOV than 420 mm does

 

Thanks.

F/l 384 will surely do the trick. Maybe I could have tilted the camera just a liiitle bit more.
I was also wondering about if I had to much exposure time. Maybe going down to 300s or even 240s or changing to ISO 400 instead, but then again, will I lose some dim parts then?
Seems like you captured most of M31 on that picture even the faint parts. Seems easy but... Looking forward to see your pic with the 384 :)

[Ceph]

On 12/07/2018 at 09:03, bluegoatwoods said:

Nice! To both of you.

To paraphrase Sam Gamgee, "Well if I could take pictures like that.....then I'd call myself an astronomer!"

Thanks
Talking pictures likes this is of course about the gear you have. I have no better then this today a modified DSLR camera, and some mediocre tubes and a mount the gives me nothing but problems (Skywatcher NEQ6 Pro).
But it still gave me this result which I am happy over. To take the final step I need to tripple my investment in this hobby. I have heard that talking photos with a CCD is much easier, I don't know.
I also know that the material I capture must be rather good and the final stage is the editing that can be a long long journey getting a picture as good as it could be, I am not sure that my M31 here can't be improved with
another approach when editing it. It is also depending from where you takes the pictures, I live in a little light polluted area and have most of the time an annoying haze, travelling is not an option for me as I need to drive
so far and as the weather is so unpredictable. If driving from home when the weather forecast says clear skies, arriving at location and the sky is filled with clouds... (Guess it is no easy game to predict the weather today)
I also have been thinking abot moving over to narrow band photography with a CCD, but after last season were I had around 4 clear nights from sep-may I don't feel like doing such an investment.

[tomato]

Ceph, that's a super image, great colour and detail, and perfectly framed, a lot of images seem to clip the ends even when on the diagonal, but yours is all there.

I am not sure why, but your image somehow seems to convey the 'face on spiral viewed from an angle' orientation better than most images of this galaxy, maybe its because I can follow the dust lanes all the way round the core.

Nice one!

Steve

[Ceph]

18 hours ago, tomato said:

Ceph, that's a super image, great colour and detail, and perfectly framed, a lot of images seem to clip the ends even when on the diagonal, but yours is all there.

I am not sure why, but your image somehow seems to convey the 'face on spiral viewed from an angle' orientation better than most images of this galaxy, maybe its because I can follow the dust lanes all the way round the core.

Nice one!

Steve

Thanks for your nice comment Steve.

Sometimes all goes as you likes and I was happy that i turned out as it did.

Jimmy

[lux eterna]

On 13/07/2018 at 06:17, Ceph said:

Thanks.

F/l 384 will surely do the trick. Maybe I could have tilted the camera just a liiitle bit more.
I was also wondering about if I had to much exposure time. Maybe going down to 300s or even 240s or changing to ISO 400 instead, but then again, will I lose some dim parts then?
Seems like you captured most of M31 on that picture even the faint parts. Seems easy but... Looking forward to see your pic with the 384

I think M31 is very pleased with that portrait ! ? You already have a great picture here but if you still want to take it a bit further, take some pics with lower exposures and blend that into the core to improve the highlight area. That is a good thing with this hobby - you can return to previous targets and improve things over and over. A never ending process, but I appreciate the process as much as the result.

Ragnar

[Ceph]

18 hours ago, lux eterna said:

I think M31 is very pleased with that portrait ! ? You already have a great picture here but if you still want to take it a bit further, take some pics with lower exposures and blend that into the core to improve the highlight area. That is a good thing with this hobby - you can return to previous targets and improve things over and over. A never ending process, but I appreciate the process as much as the result.

Ragnar

Thanks Ragnar.

Yes that would probably do the trick. As you say, the objects is still out there, even though they are moving with mind blowing speeds they seems to be looking same as they did before the next day or year if you like. I will get back to M31 one day to collect a little more data.

[HunterHarling]

On 11/07/2018 at 21:14, Ceph said:

M31 I captured last autumn, even though I only have FL 420mm it seems like it still don't fully fits in the image.

Astro Tech AT 65Q

Canon700D Baader mod

5x120, 33x360 at ISO 800

Hope you likes it

Whoa! This is awesome!

Do you like the AT65Q?

[Ceph]

47 minutes ago, HunterHarling said:

Whoa! This is awesome!

Do you like the AT65Q?

Thanks.

I have only had the chance to take 4 pics with the AT650, three of them ended up really well. The fourth pic was affected by the weather so I can't blame AT650 for that. So yes I am happy with it as you gets a lot of telescope
for not very much money. With that focal length it is also so much easier to use then any of my other tubes.
Here is another one taken with the AT650:  The Veil

[tony210]

Hi - great image that does justice to a near neighbour- Tony.

[Ceph]

20 hours ago, tony210 said:

Hi - great image that does justice to a near neighbour- Tony.

Thanks for your kind words Tony.

Jimmy

[Rodd]

Great job--how go you get the rich colors?  I find M31 to be a colorless blob.

Rodd

[Ceph]

1 hour ago, Rodd said:

Great job--how go you get the rich colors?  I find M31 to be a colorless blob.

Rodd

Thanks Rodd.

Actually my biggest issue with M31 was to hold back the colors and still make the little pink nebulas (or what it is) visible in Andromeda.
Here is my very first attempt on M31 with same material used as above picture:


I have a std procedure in Pixinsight which I always tries to follow and I have found that this works best for me and for my DSLR Canon 700D.
I can add some other functions depending on how the picture reacts, but my standard procedure is:

1. Dynamic background extraction, On "Tolerance" I use normally between 1.0 or 1.5 else I use yellow marked settings.
   Remove all markings from galaxy or Nebula even faint parts, do a test if needed
  

2. Background neutralization
   Next I seldom uses anymore if at all, I learned to use it from an online video guide, but I have found that sometimes it actually damaged
   my picture and above all the colors in the picture, so don't use 2. 1. Color calibration, but there are no straight lines here, if the pic turnes out ugly try and use it.

3. Real streching with HistogramTransformation, this I do in steps, not all at once, actullay don't know if I needs to do it in several steps but it works for me.

4. Create a mask by extracting "Image/Extract/Lightness". and use LRGBCombination
   Saturation must be tested several times, don't go to high with the colors, stop a little bit before "happy", Some recommend to use "Chrominance Noise reduciton", on my pics I have
   found that there is no reason, maybe it is another story with an CCD camera?

5. Next I use SCNR to remove a little green color

6. Then back to the newly created lightness mask, invert it, (mush easier to see) "Image/invert".  In HT I normally do two masks, one for tuning the contrast

 

7. And one for tuning the colors here you drags the HT bar a little longer to the left at least until you see the faint parts of the object is starting to vanish. This is a fingertip thing that can differ a little from pic to pic

8. Attach the Color mask and invert the mask on the picture or try without doing that, you will see what you need.
   Use "CurvesTransformation" for the final tuning on the object. In this stage, don't look to much on the stars as they can be fixed a little later with a starmask

This is my normal way on all my pics in Pixinsight and as pics differ so may the method, but I don't think I can exclude any of above meantioned, just add others
I have never failed getting the colors by doing this method. As you see on above M31 sample, my worries is to much colors.
On Andromeda I did not use "2. 1. Color calibration" nor on this pic used here California nebula, I am not sure if I have used it anymore since I stoped using it so to speak.

Hopes it helps

/Jimmy

 

[Ceph]

Clarification: I always use "Background neutralization"

[Rodd]

5 minutes ago, Ceph said:

Clarification: I always use "Background neutralization"

Thanks for the tips.  All sounds familiar.  I'll keep at it

Rodd