M42-Lum

[Rodd]

I  started  project I am not sure I can finish.  This is 75 30 sec lum subs of M42 using FSQ 106 with .6x reducer and asi 1600.  I am not sure I will continue--these subs were not the greatest--you can see the haze around the brighter stars.  Conditions were not very good.  Stars are too large (high FWHM). But I wanted to leave the scope shooting all night while I slept and M42 is well positioned for that at this time for me. Any advice on this target would be appreciated.  Is HDR composition absolutely necessary to prevent a blown core?  I plan on shooting a range of exposure lengths-from 2 sec to 2 min--which makes  complex processing.  This is a target that needs to be done right if one is going to tackle it in the first place.   So far, it has about 37  minutes of data--not much but surprisingly bright and detailed for such limited data.

Not much processing--just a doodle so to speak, trying to decide it its worth continuing, or starting over  when I am ready.  One thing is for certain, many, many more hours of data are needed.  I could have brought out the surrounding dust, but the noise is too high due to the shortage of signal.  Its there though!

 

 

[Star101]

If you are not happy with the haze, I would suggest starting again. Or at least weeding out the hazy subs.

I tried several attempts on M51 but kept getting a hazy image. At the time, the weather just would not get any better. My solution was to book a week at Ollys lol. Best M51 ever

I do hope the weather improves for you soon and you get some crystal clear skies 

[Rodd]

2 hours ago, Star101 said:

I would suggest starting again. Or at least weeding out the hazy subs.

I  tried this.  I was left with only 5 subs!  At least I got 5 I can use.

Rodd

[teoria_del_big_bang]

When people told me Astro-Photography was challenging they were not wrong.  I am very new to this and had a few sessions and really appreciate all the effort and expertise that goes into creating some of the fantastic images seen on this forum.

To me your image above is great even though you are disappointing with it.  Yes I can see what you are not happy with and I imagine that if you want to produce great images then you have to be this fussy and discard any frames that are not to your liking.

Good luck for the next session, sorry I cannot help but my knowledge is way below yours.

Steve

[Adreneline]

If you hadn't mentioned the haze I would not immediately have noticed - probably because we seem to live under permanent haze (otherwise known as pollution) and all my images look like that! Don't beat yourself up Rodd - it's a very good image of a tricky target and this forum is all about sharing successes and non-successes. In my book any image of a dso is a success - this is one difficult hobby! Out of focus, not well framed, wrong colours (big can of worms in that one!) - the mere fact there is something there at all is a success. It's not like photographing a building - it's more on a par with photographing the wife!  

Thank you for sharing another remarkable image.

Adrian

 

[AstroAndy]

Hi Rodd

Looks legit to me. As to HDR composition, there are many ways to skin a cat. You can do the layer masking bit, or this little 4 stepper I do, because it isn't too much trouble. After stacking and pre-processing, you can copy a short exposure over a long one, use the lasso to surround the parts you want to change, feather it 2ce (you might have to experiment w/ the feathering radius), then >layer >masks > reveal selection (or hide selection if it's the wrong way around (eg. long sub layered on short), and voila.

Hope that helps.

- Andy -

[Rodd]

3 hours ago, teoria_del_big_bang said:

When people told me Astro-Photography was challenging they were not wrong.  I am very new to this and had a few sessions and really appreciate all the effort and expertise that goes into creating some of the fantastic images seen on this forum.

To me your image above is great even though you are disappointing with it.  Yes I can see what you are not happy with and I imagine that if you want to produce great images then you have to be this fussy and discard any frames that are not to your liking.

Good luck for the next session, sorry I cannot help but my knowledge is way below yours.

Steve

Thanks Steve--don't be sorry.  It sounds like you are stoking a passion for this field.....and looking at images, good or bad, has a tendency to feed the passion like a bellows.  Be warned, though....that infant nugget of inspiration, currently chained up in a corner,  is bound to grow   into a formidable, hungry need that no chain or boundary can contain.  Welcome to the forum!

Rodd

[Rodd]

2 hours ago, Adreneline said:

If you hadn't mentioned the haze I would not immediately have noticed - probably because we seem to live under permanent haze (otherwise known as pollution) and all my images look like that! Don't beat yourself up Rodd - it's a very good image of a tricky target and this forum is all about sharing successes and non-successes. In my book any image of a dso is a success - this is one difficult hobby! Out of focus, not well framed, wrong colours (big can of worms in that one!) - the mere fact there is something there at all is a success. It's not like photographing a building - it's more on a par with photographing the wife!  

Thank you for sharing another remarkable image.

Adrian

 

Thanks Adrian.  Its a start.  Fortunately it does not seem that this is a region of the sky plagued with noise (some are for me for some reason.  Vlaiv explained it to me but, alas, it still mystifies me).  I understand what you mean about photographing the wife--never happy with the image, one, two , three tries, and everyone groaning and gesticulating (especially the waiter she asked to "take our picture").  Me making funny faces doesn't help.

Rodd

[Rodd]

40 minutes ago, AstroAndy said:

Hi Rodd

Looks legit to me. As to HDR composition, there are many ways to skin a cat. You can do the layer masking bit, or this little 4 stepper I do, because it isn't too much trouble. After stacking and pre-processing, you can copy a short exposure over a long one, use the lasso to surround the parts you want to change, feather it 2ce (you might have to experiment w/ the feathering radius), then >layer >masks > reveal selection (or hide selection if it's the wrong way around (eg. long sub layered on short), and voila.

Hope that helps.

- Andy -

Thanks Andy--I do have a copy of PS on disc, but have yet to dip the toe (I am waiting for the urge to take a plunge instead).  We'll see.  Sometimes the images that reveal the core and trapezium look artificial to me--just not right somehow.  Too much compression, or whatever.  I think it happens when the core/trapezium is presented at the same dynamic range as the outer areas.  It gives it a sort of flat expression.  I know with the small pixels the the trapezium will be resolved even at a focal length of 318 (providing I get a clear night and keep the FWHM in check).  I do like the idea of overlying a shorter sub image of the core over the  final image---I do that quite often in PI.  Same cat, different knife I suppose.

Rodd

[Rodd]

12 hours ago, Star101 said:

Or at least weeding out the hazy subs.

 

4 hours ago, teoria_del_big_bang said:

Good luck for the next session

 

3 hours ago, Adreneline said:

hank you for sharing another remarkable image

 

1 hour ago, AstroAndy said:

Looks legit to me

Well guys--a little better I think--more of the surrounding dust is visible.  I started with a masked stretch--something I rarely emply.  Then I tweaked and modified.  This is about it for this data I think.  Thanks for looking

Rodd