First venture into mono imaging

[knobby]

So, here I am at the start of a new learning curve. My first Ha capture, I wanted to try the horse head but it was too low so moved up and left to the rosette. It's not brilliant but it will always be my first mono capture.

ZWO 1600 M, Ha filter, SW ED72 - W.O. 0.8 reducer. Best of 20 X 180 seconds and 10 matching darks at -15°c

Resized and crop to centre better and remove stacking artifacts.

 

[teoria_del_big_bang]

I am no expert and actually on the very same learning curve as yourself with very similar equipment but for a first image that looks exceptional.  Others with good knowledge will probably have some good  advice where to improve, but I would certainly be more than happy with that image.

Steve

[knobby]

Thanks Steve, must admit, when I was capturing image that close to the moon and low down in the murk of East London's LP I did wonder what it would look like . I've done a false colour version ... Looks prettier ?

[souls33k3r]

An awesome first light matey. Now you'll wonder why you never hit the mono imaging route earlier

[knobby]

2 minutes ago, souls33k3r said:

An awesome first light matey. Now you'll wonder why you never hit the mono imaging route earlier

Thanks Ahmud, you're right ... Wish I'd have done it before the Horse head got too low.

[Knight of Clear Skies]

Lots of detail in there, looks very promising. The mono version is quite noisy, could be sky noise from London but I'd recommend taking 30+ darks as 10 may not average out that well. Is the background a bit on the dark side perhaps?

I'm enjoying imaging in Ha. Even from a very dark site you get more detail and contrast, and the processing is easier and less time consuming.

[carastro]

Great result.  You will love narrowband it opens up many more opportunities.  Only comment is I think overall  it is a little dark.

Carole 

[knobby]

29 minutes ago, Knight of Clear Skies said:

Lots of detail in there, looks very promising. The mono version is quite noisy, could be sky noise from London but I'd recommend taking 30+ darks as 10 may not average out that well. Is the background a bit on the dark side perhaps?

I'm enjoying imaging in Ha. Even from a very dark site you get more detail and contrast, and the processing is easier and less time consuming.

Thank you , I didn't take any flats due to time constraints and had a severe gradient so used a Photoshop synthetic flat, in doing so clipped the blacks ?

Limited flats as to keen to process it to see what I'd managed .

11 minutes ago, carastro said:

Great result.  You will love narrowband it opens up many more opportunities.  Only comment is I think overall  it is a little dark.

Carole 

Thanks Carole, very rushed processing as above.

[Gina]

Extremely good first image - tons better than my first that's for sure. 

[iansmith]

Not bad, but you need more data. Aim for as much as you have time/patience for. At least 4 hours to double the SNR. 

Cheers, Ian

[knobby]

Thanks Ian, now I've sussed plate solving I guess I can add data as the nights allow.

[alan potts]

Nice one Knobby, very red, not so sure about that but it is only personal taste. I haven't even thought about Mono or OSC since because of on going issues. However I found another problem with having too much kit, I picked up the wrong laptop, you can read the rest in my thread. Plate solving, not a chance of that for me, but I am good at Plate washing.

I noticed last night that Sirius and Orion are treed out to quote SPM an hour after dark now and the Rosette is not far behind, guess it will still be there next year or later this.

Alan

[ollypenrice]

2 hours ago, knobby said:

Thanks Ian, now I've sussed plate solving I guess I can add data as the nights allow.

I've never used plate solving in my life: I just reframe by eye. ?

It's a great start to mono imaging. Others have given good advice on how to take it further.

Olly

[iansmith]

3 hours ago, knobby said:

Thanks Ian, now I've sussed plate solving I guess I can add data as the nights allow.

Yes, being able to come back to the same target night after night (or, with our weather, year after year ?), allows you to capture much more data on it. I get anywhere between 4 to 8 hours per filter. I’m inclined these days to go for 8 hours, which makes for a low output of images, but I think the extra SNR makes for a better picture. Also, going mono allows for the use of narrow band filters and that brings the option to image when the Moon is up (depending on the faintness of your target and it’s proximity to the Moon).

Cheers, Ian.

[ollypenrice]

1 hour ago, iansmith said:

Yes, being able to come back to the same target night after night (or, with our weather, year after year ?), allows you to capture much more data on it. I get anywhere between 4 to 8 hours per filter. I’m inclined these days to go for 8 hours, which makes for a low output of images, but I think the extra SNR makes for a better picture. Also, going mono allows for the use of narrow band filters and that brings the option to image when the Moon is up (depending on the faintness of your target and it’s proximity to the Moon).

Cheers, Ian.

I think your conclusion forces itself on every imager by degrees. I remember, as a beginner, taking three targets per night. I now spend three nights per target with a dual scope rig...

Olly

Edit: Knobby, worth noting that your focus looks immaculate. This is very important.

[knobby]

Cheers Olly, I must admit that I've avoided mono for a long time as I don't get much time to image ... It's probably mainly down to you that I made the leap, you're educated arguements pro the benefit of using all the pixels being actually quicker than OSC and the Bayer matrix being inefficient that tipped me over the edge ? oh, and set point cooling !