M104

[Rodd]

M104 at a focal length of 318mm? I must be crazy!  It was 4:30am and I had a bit of darkness left, so I decided to see how well the little FSQ 106 with the .6x reducer could portray the fabled M104-one of my favorite galaxies.  This is 29 1 min Lum subs, fully calibrated and lightly processed.  At regular viewing, M104 is indeed small and non-descript.  But at full resolution-the dust lane is obvious, as is the central bulge, and even a few of the encircling globulars.  I am not sure completing an LRGB image at this scale will be satisfying--I should do that with a longer FL--but it was a very rewarding experiment.  If I was better at processing star fields it would be a beautiful composition provided I had the requisite amount of data (ie..a bunch).

Rodd

[Barry-Wilson]

Hi Rodd

Glaxies set in context, like your fine WIP image above, really do work if the structure of the galaxy or cluster of galaxies is discernible.  Well done.

[Rodd]

7 minutes ago, Barry-Wilson said:

Hi Rodd

Glaxies set in context, like your fine WIP image above, really do work if the structure of the galaxy or cluster of galaxies is discernible.  Well done.

Thanks, Barry.  I tried to grab more subs a couple nights later, but the conditions had deteriorated and 1 min subs resulted in a complete overexposure--there was a light haze.  This is in a very precarious location in the sky for me.  It will be interesting to see if I can get a full data set.

Rodd

[vlaiv]

It looks lovely.

One thing that amazes me about this galaxy is that it always looks sharp in the images. The dust/shadow ring that is. If you look at your image - stars are quite fatter (due to seeing, sampling and small aperture used) than image of the galaxy would suggest.

Did you sharpen the galaxy alone (using some sort of star mask)?

[Rodd]

8 minutes ago, vlaiv said:

It looks lovely.

One thing that amazes me about this galaxy is that it always looks sharp in the images. The dust/shadow ring that is. If you look at your image - stars are quite fatter (due to seeing, sampling and small aperture used) than image of the galaxy would suggest.

Did you sharpen the galaxy alone (using some sort of star mask)?

Indeed I did--but not very much as there isn't that much data and the effects were not very noticeable.    Conditions were not very good, and this is Lum, which is more sensitive than red.  FWHM values were not very good (nowhere near 1.6x the pixel scale--more like 3-3.5x).  Certainly, if I were to do this image for real, I would expect to toss many of these subs (maybe all of them).

Rodd

[vlaiv]

10 minutes ago, Rodd said:

Indeed I did--but not very much as there isn't that much data and the effects were not very noticeable.    Conditions were not very good, and this is Lum, which is more sensitive than red.  FWHM values were not very good (nowhere near 1.6x the pixel scale--more like 3-3.5x).  Certainly, if I were to do this image for real, I would expect to toss many of these subs (maybe all of them).

Rodd

But still, galactic "edge" seems so well defined, and this is not the first time I've seen this. Interesting galaxy indeed!

[Rodd]

7 minutes ago, vlaiv said:

But still, galactic "edge" seems so well defined, and this is not the first time I've seen this. Interesting galaxy indeed!

Agreed--that's why I thought it was suitable for posting.  With more and better subs, I know I can resolve finer details within the dust lane--and perhaps the central bulge as well.  But alas...the Moon is back.  Ha tonight (the Boogie Man, not M104)

Rodd 

[Dinglem]

Nice capture, even though it's small it's obvious what it is. Just don't let the tabloids see it, they will claim it's a UFO on the wat to destroy the earth!!

[Petergoodhew]

Nice job Rodd.  I've never seen M104 in such a wide field setting.  It's really striking just how lonely a galaxy can be!

Peter

[Rodd]

7 minutes ago, Petergoodhew said:

Nice job Rodd.  I've never seen M104 in such a wide field setting.  It's really striking just how lonely a galaxy can be!

Peter

Thanks, Peter!  I saw a deeper image of M104 and I was surprised at the number of galaxies in the background, including what can only be described as a double spiral.  I didn't hoot enough subs to capture them--maybe if I continue.

Rodd

[MarsG76]

Looks cool... i like it, shows the vastness in which it situated.

 

[Seanelly]

I'm a big fan of this galaxy, and you've done it proud!

[Rodd]

2 hours ago, MarsG76 said:

Looks cool... i like it, shows the vastness in which it situated.

 

Thanks MG.  Now I am looking forward to finishing this one

Rodd

[Rodd]

1 minute ago, Seanelly said:

I'm a big fan of this galaxy, and you've done it proud!

Thanks Sean.  I have always wanted to shoot it at a long focal length--but I do like the wider FOV as well

Rodd

[Seanelly]

21 minutes ago, Rodd said:

Thanks Sean.  I have always wanted to shoot it at a long focal length--but I do like the wider FOV as well

Rodd

It is the galaxy displayed on my profile page. Hopefully, by the time it is convenient for me to image (at 765 focal length) this spring, my gear and software will be familiar enough to me to capture it well enough to replace my profile page!

[Rodd]

7 minutes ago, Seanelly said:

It is the galaxy displayed on my profile page. Hopefully, by the time it is convenient for me to image (at 765 focal length) this spring, my gear and software will be familiar enough to me to capture it well enough to replace my profile page!

That is a great thing to look forward to. I hope you get clear, dark skies for your shoot.  Looking forward to seeing your image.

Rodd

[Paul73]

A gem. Lovely work.

Paul

[Rodd]

18 hours ago, Dinglem said:

Nice capture, even though it's small it's obvious what it is. Just don't let the tabloids see it, they will claim it's a UFO on the wat to destroy the earth!!

Thanks, Dinglem--Definitely more like a UFO than a sombrero. m But let's call it what it is....a "flying saucer"!

Rodd

[Rodd]

5 hours ago, Paul73 said:

A gem. Lovely work.

Paul

Thanks Paul!

Rodd