NGC 6823

[Rodd]

It has taken me a long time to get this image to a point that I am happy with.  Not perfect, but I can live with it.  The dense starfield combined with faint, pervasive nebulosity was the main issue.

FSQ 106 with .6x reducer and asi 1600 with 3nm Astrodon filters

Ha: 142 300 sec

OIII: 90 300 sec

SII: 82 300 sec

 

 

[Adam J]

Have you tried using starnet++ to help deal with the stars / nebula balance?

Edited December 5, 2019 by Adam J

[simmo39]

Nice one Rodd.

[Rodd]

2 minutes ago, Adam J said:

have you tried using starnet++ to help deal with the stars / nebula balance?

No.  IMO many starless images look s bit.....well I am just not into them.  I am sure it could be useful to reduce the number of stars, but I don’t really want to remove something that is there.  I want to portray the scene with all its components, though well balanced.   The proper settings In  morphological transformation work well at reducing star profiles but not removing stars. It can be a delicate balance though

[Rodd]

5 minutes ago, simmo39 said:

Nice one Rodd.

Thanks.  

[Adam J]

1 minute ago, Rodd said:

No.  IMO many starless images look s bit.....well I am just not into them.  I am sure it could be useful to reduce the number of stars, but I don’t really want to remove something that is there.  I want to portray the scene with all its components, though well balanced.   The proper settings In  morphological transformation work well at reducing star profiles but not removing stars. It can be a delicate balance though

Oh i never remove them as such, they tend to go back in as they came out, it just makes processing the nebula easier. 

[Rodd]

2 minutes ago, Adam J said:

Oh i never remove them as such, they tend to go back in as they came out, it just makes processing the nebula easier. 

I have removed stars for that purpose too using well fitting star masks.  I get 95% of the stars—all the small ones, just not some of the big ones but they are not the problem.  Sometimes it does help. I tried that a while ago with this image. I couldn’t capitalize on it though. 

[alan potts]

Not perfect, go stand in the corner. Looks wonderful to me. You always seem to come up with things that don't get captured so often, or I just don't recognise it.

Alan

[Rodd]

1 hour ago, alan potts said:

Not perfect, go stand in the corner. Looks wonderful to me. You always seem to come up with things that don't get captured so often, or I just don't recognise it.

Alan

Thanks Alan.  Widefield shots of this target are not as common as closer in shots of the bright region for some reason--probably because the outer regions are quite faint and not easy to process by any standards.   It takes a lot of data to really do the region justice.  I think I was inspired to shoot this FOV from a Sara Wager image a couple of years ago--so they are out there, but not common.

 

[Ceph]

I could also live with a picture like that, thats is a beautiful image.

[Rodd]

1 minute ago, Ceph said:

I could also live with a picture like that, thats is a beautiful image.

Thanks Ceph..............eus (couldn't resist).

[bob-c]

Love it, very well done.

Bob.

[Rodd]

1 hour ago, bob-c said:

Love it, very well done.

Bob.

Thanks Bob!

[glowingturnip]

i like the composition on that - main area of interest off-centre, rule-of-thirds and all that, so you make a feature of the leg of brown dust etc - nice

[Rodd]

1 hour ago, glowingturnip said:

i like the composition on that - main area of interest off-centre, rule-of-thirds and all that, so you make a feature of the leg of brown dust etc - nice

Thanks Stuart.  This FOV reminds me of Garuda...the Indonesian God of....something or other...a winged creature.  I have had mixed feelings about the composition since the area to the upper right seems to be a lot more interesting than the vacant space to the lower left. 

Rodd

[carastro]

Very nice Rodd.

Carole 

[Rodd]

47 minutes ago, carastro said:

Very nice Rodd.

Carole 

Thanks Carole

Rodd

[MartinB]

That is really nice Rodd.  It all looks great from fine detail to the colour. 

The 0.6 reducer must bring you down below F3.  Do you think that cuts out some signal with the 3nm filters?

[Rodd]

1 hour ago, MartinB said:

That is really nice Rodd.  It all looks great from fine detail to the colour. 

The 0.6 reducer must bring you down below F3.  Do you think that cuts out some signal with the 3nm filters?

Thanks Martin.  It brings the focal ratio to F3.  I called Astrodon and asked them and they said I would be OK.  I think their web page has been changed to say up to F3--before it was up to F3.5.  There may be a small loss, but Its hard to know. 

Rodd

[MartinB]

25 minutes ago, Rodd said:

Thanks Martin.  It brings the focal ratio to F3.  I called Astrodon and asked them and they said I would be OK.  I think their web page has been changed to say up to F3--before it was up to F3.5.  There may be a small loss, but Its hard to know. 

Rodd

Whatever, it works!!