The Veil Complex bicolour

[MartinB 2,009]

This has been a bit of a project.  Last year I worked out that my 200mm Canon F2.8 lens and ASI1600 would frame the whole of the Veil complex quite nicely.  I captured Ha and OIII data for the east and west nebulae with a Tak FSQ 106 and added this into the widefield image.  Although the Tak data had to be shrunk down it did add a bit of extra resolution where it was needed.  

The difficulty for me has been the processing.  I have found it really difficult to tease out the faint wisps of detail and have tried the usual routines of micro contrast adjustments using curves along with Scott Rosen's Screen blend/mask inversion method but the results weren't great owing to the close proximity of faint and bright nebulosity.  I'd heard about the PI process tool for removing stars, Starnet, so loaded this and had a rare foray into PI.  This proved very helpful.  It was a luminence created from Ha and OIII using the 200mm lens with the Tak data mixed in.  Then the starless layer was added in PS with the screen blend mode at 50% opacity.  The nebulosity detail was so well preserved I didn't need a mask.  After blending I reduced the stars a bit more using the starless layer again and darken as the blend at 50%.  I should really unleash some of the stars to add a bit of "punch" but I've wrestled with this data enough for now!  I plan to use it further as I look deeper into the Gorgon that is PixInsight!

Telescope: Tak 106 for E and W veils.  Canon 200mmL lens

Camera: ZWO ASI 1600 pro mono cmos, Gain 150, offset 50

Filters: Baader 7nm OIII and Ha

E+W Veil 10x30 mins each channel for each nebula.  Whole complex 50x5mins for each channel

Captured with SGP, calibrated, aligned and combined with PI, processed mainly with PS but PI for Starnet.  Ha mapped to red and OIII to both blue and green

 

[ollypenrice 24,300]

Fabulous. Controlling the stars really is the challenge with the widefield Veil. I must have a go with Starnet.

Olly

[Adreneline 1,026]

16 hours ago, MartinB said:

processed mainly with PS but PI for Starnet

I really love this image. I really like seeing these large targets in their entirety with a bit of surrounding space. Details are good but I would rather have FoV.

Star removal is an interesting tool in the processing box. So far I've tried Straton (works on linear, and the most expensive), Starnett++ (works on non-linear and free!) and Annie's Astro Actions (works when ever you apply it and comes bundled with a bunch of useful PS tools for AP) and all have their place.

I quite like fully processing an image and then removing the stars with AAA; it often reveals details the eye missed with the stars present but purists on this and other forums are often singularly unimpressed by starless images. As Starnet++ only works on non-linear images I have found it best not to stretch too far before removing the stars otherwise your options for further stretching get limited but that may be my own processing limitations coming to bear. With Straton you have to remember to register the images before you whip the stars out - done that a few times - but does allow more freedom on taking the image non-linear.

Now, I think I'd best go back and have another crack at my Veil images having been inspired by yours.

Thanks for sharing.

Adrian

[MartinB 2,009]

1 hour ago, ollypenrice said:

Fabulous. Controlling the stars really is the challenge with the widefield Veil. I must have a go with Starnet.

Olly

Exactly Olly, the stars really become intrusive.  Also, when you obliterate the stars faint details pop out and you can do a screen blend with a starless layer make use of this.  You have described using an equalise adjustment previously but I think this method gives more control.  Here is a link https://sourceforge.net/projects/starnet/files/PixInsight_module/ 

[MartinB 2,009]

26 minutes ago, Adreneline said:

I really love this image. I really like seeing these large targets in their entirety with a bit of surrounding space. Details are good but I would rather have FoV.

Star removal is an interesting tool in the processing box. So far I've tried Straton (works on linear, and the most expensive), Starnett++ (works on non-linear and free!) and Annie's Astro Actions (works when ever you apply it and comes bundled with a bunch of useful PS tools for AP) and all have their place.

I quite like fully processing an image and then removing the stars with AAA; it often reveals details the eye missed with the stars present but purists on this and other forums are often singularly unimpressed by starless images. As Starnet++ only works on non-linear images I have found it best not to stretch too far before removing the stars otherwise your options for further stretching get limited but that may be my own processing limitations coming to bear. With Straton you have to remember to register the images before you whip the stars out - done that a few times - but does allow more freedom on taking the image non-linear.

Now, I think I'd best go back and have another crack at my Veil images having been inspired by yours.

Thanks for sharing.

Adrian

Thank you Adrian.  I will have a look at Straton, given the cost of astroimaging kit it isn't expensive!  I have had AAA installed for a number of years and have used her star reduction.  It seems to be based around the PS dust and noise filter and I've found it difficult to create a mask which works really smoothly.  

Look forward to seeing your Veil images.  Send me a pm so I don't miss them.

[ollypenrice 24,300]

15 minutes ago, MartinB said:

Thank you Adrian.  I will have a look at Straton, given the cost of astroimaging kit it isn't expensive!  I have had AAA installed for a number of years and have used her star reduction.  It seems to be based around the PS dust and noise filter and I've found it difficult to create a mask which works really smoothly.  

Look forward to seeing your Veil images.  Send me a pm so I don't miss them.

I've never got a grain of sense out of Straton but that doesn't mean you won't!

ly

[apophisOAS 278]

Wondeful,

Roger

[MartinB 2,009]

Thanks Roger

[GraemeH 187]

Wow - that sings from my screen.

[Laurin Dave 833]

That's lovely Martin..  very nicely done and you've given me an idea!

Dave

[MartinB 2,009]

50 minutes ago, GraemeH said:

Wow - that sings from my screen.

Thanks Graeme, hope it's in tune!

40 minutes ago, Laurin Dave said:

That's lovely Martin..  very nicely done and you've given me an idea!

Dave

Hope it's a good one Laurin

[tomato 1,363]

A superb wide field Veil Nebula,  I am more into imaging galaxies so capturing this would be quite a challenge with my kit, but if anything can persuade me to try, it is an image of this quality.

Steve

[MartinB 2,009]

Thank you Steve, that's very kind.  Galaxies have always been a struggle for me with Bottle 5 skies but worse since the change to mercury lighting.

[x6gas 923]

Absolutely stunning Martin and an impressive demonstration of what can be achieved with a relatively modest amount of data (if ten hours can be called modest...!)

Another inspirational image from you, thanks for posting.

[MartinB 2,009]

Thanks x6gas.  Yes, some more data would have been nice but Cygnus is sinking fast now.  At F2.8 4 hours per channel works out at quite a lot of signal although I suspect my 7nm filters may be just starting to block some of the emission lines.

[alan4908 2,235]

That is impressive ! 

I've also made some progress into Pixinsight and away from PS. I was helped enormously by the Adam Block tutorials on Pixinsight which you might also find of use: https://adamblockstudios.com/categories/PixInsight

Alan

[MartinB 2,009]

5 hours ago, alan4908 said:

That is impressive ! 

I've also made some progress into Pixinsight and away from PS. I was helped enormously by the Adam Block tutorials on Pixinsight which you might also find of use: https://adamblockstudios.com/categories/PixInsight

Alan

Thank you Alan.  I'm actually using his tutorials although they tend to send me to sleep!  He also guided me through PS and CCDStack.  Expensive though especially if I get through "fundamentals"  and move onto "horizons".  Mind you, it hardly registers when compared with what I've spent on hardware!

[tooth_dr 4,707]

Wonderful! This makes me want to attach a ccd to my 180mm Nikon lens 

[MartinB 2,009]

7 minutes ago, tooth_dr said:

Wonderful! This makes me want to attach a ccd to my 180mm Nikon lens 

Thank you doc.  Yes, definitely worth giving the 180mm a go.  Making sure you can achieve focus is the main issue.

[Mr Spock 6,270]

Great looking image. So much detail!