IC443 - the Jellyfish Nebula

[Skipper Billy]

IC443 - the Jellyfish Nebula. Imaged over the 1st and 2nd January 2021. 2.5 hours each of Ha and Sii and 6 hours of Oiii. 4" frac and Atik 16200. Processed in Pixinsight. Presented as HOS (Hubble pallet) and HOO (which is very noisy as the Oiii data was so weak.) Having a 90% moon nearby didn't make life any easier !!!

CC very welcome. (Especially on how to tackle to two really bright stars - short of buying Astrodon or Chroma filters thank you!)

 

[m.tweedy]

Nice to see the wider version of this. There is a star reduction in StarTools but I am unsure how to properly use it yet. I don't have Pixinsight so cannot help. Buy some Chroma you know you will anyway.

 

[Uranium235]

If you have Ps, the stars could be sorted out using layer masks.

Easy... cha cha cha

[TareqPhoto]

You have nice expensive mount, scope and camera and now filters are stopping you? Very funny.

I wish to have a high quality/end mount and also high end scope and camera, i can try to do a lot, but my sky isn't agree.

[tooth_dr]

Very nice image Skipper.   The haloes for me don’t really detract from it. 

[Hallingskies]

5 hours ago, tooth_dr said:

Very nice image Skipper.   The haloes for me don’t really detract from it. 

I agree.  There are only two stars that are a little OTT.  In PSP I’d just layer the stretched image over an unstretched one without the haloes, and carefully feather/erase the top layer around the flared stars to let the lower layer through. I don’t do Pixielights, can’t stand the jargon...🤪🤪🤪

[Skipper Billy]

Thanks guys.

[athornett]

The image almost feels 3D. Incredible!

[peter shah]

Love that....the 2nd get my vote!

[MartinB]

Very nicely framed and perfect for.  I always prefer HOO on this target and the wispy oiii looks lovely.

I always find halos much harder to process out than simple flaring.  You can kind of do it with layers or with colour range selection but difficult to do without leaving unnatural artefacts.  Some form of pixel math in PI I guess.