vdb141

[geordie85]

I managed to capture just shy of 4 hours of data on VdB 141 from my back garden which are under Bortle 6 skies. Tuesday is forecast to be clear all night with 0% moon. Would it be worth continuing to capture data, or will it be a fruitless endeavour under my skies? I'm intending to be imaging from 20:30 till 05:30 so i should have enough data to keep the noise under control. Or should I just image another target? Unfortunately my views are limited to the North and East. Cannot image to the South or West.

This is my best attempt with my data before noise becomes too much of a problem. I've also uploaded the stacked, un-stretched tiff if anyone would like to have a go with my data (although it is a rather big file.

Image details are 45 X 300 second subs. Darks, flats and dark flats applied. QHY183C camera, William Optics FLT98 carbon fibre scope with HOTECH flattener and no filters used

VDB 141.tif

[ebdons]

Hi I'm  new to imaging but this is quite a difficult object to image with any definition?, I attempted to do a PS process and yours is still better than what I got back. I  image with an EDT80 and have trouble getting enough data without filters on faint objects, maybe more time or more aperture? Ton

[geordie85]

2 hours ago, ebdons said:

Hi I'm  new to imaging but this is quite a difficult object to image with any definition?, I attempted to do a PS process and yours is still better than what I got back. I  image with an EDT80 and have trouble getting enough data without filters on faint objects, maybe more time or more aperture? Ton

Yes it is quite a difficult target, very dim and surrounded by dust. 

Still can't decide if there's any point in collecting more data from my back garden, or start on another target. 

[david_taurus83]

Give it a go. It can only add to the image, surely? At least you'll have tried as opposed to letting it niggle your doubt.

[david_taurus83]

.

[ollypenrice]

The image is working (every credit to you under difficult skies!) so I'd vote for more exposure. If the LP gradients had massacred the background, if the key signal had been swamped by the skyglow, then I'd have suggested you accept defeat - but this isn't the case by any means. You have The Ghost emerging from a credible background so more exposure will allow you to pump the local contrasts and increase the definition of the target.

VdB 141 is most certainly not a target which turns up in the 'Getting Started' section very often - with good reason! It's what we might call a Removed Word on SGL!  The damned thing nearly killed me, I can tell you.

Olly

[geordie85]

Thanks for the comments, I really appreciate them. I think I will continue to peruse this target and see how far I can go with it. 

I've actually re-processed this data countless times (albeit with my limited/ lack of skills) and the signal is there, its just swamped with noise and very faint. 

I thought I'd have a better result till I started looking on here and astrobin of the same target. Mainly at the imaging times and realised 4 hours is hardly enough data. 

Roll on tomorrow night. 

[geordie85]

Well I'm glad i decided to add more data to this. it has certainly helped.

This is my first process of what I'm sure will be many as i tend to re-process my data several times.

131 X 300 second subs. Gain 11 Offset 76. This is the longest I've spent on any image with this camera so far. 

I think i may need a UV/ IR cut filter though.