IC 1396 10h45m Integration

[Pryce]

I am extremely happy with the extra data, especially considering this is still only my 3rd(or 4th if you consider the extra data as a new image) astrophoto!
And I Finally solved my star halo problem!
It was stacking related as I suspected!

10h 45m integration
121x320s Lights @ ISO800
200 Bias
27 Darks
No flats
Sky-Watcher Evostar 72ED
EOS 600D Full spectrum mod
Optolong L-eNhance
EQ6-R Pro Guided (ZWO 60mm guidescope / ASI120MM mini)

Fairly quick edit here. Some basic levels adjustment, contrast and color adustments and a modest nosie reduction in Topaz DeNoise

Comments & Concerns welcome!
 

Edited January 16, 2021 by Pryce

[TerryMcK]

That looks a lot better with crisp sharp stars. Glad you got the issue sorted out.

[Laurin Dave]

That's very good, excellent considering how new you are to all this.

Well done

Dave

[ollypenrice]

Yes, excellent. If this were mine I'd be looking to enhance local contrasts in order to reveal more structure. How to go about it depends on what post processing software you use.

Olly

[Pryce]

5 hours ago, ollypenrice said:

Yes, excellent. If this were mine I'd be looking to enhance local contrasts in order to reveal more structure. How to go about it depends on what post processing software you use.

Olly

I'm using photoshop!

I strected it a bit further and enhanced local contrast to reveal some more detail and make it pop.
 

[ollypenrice]

2 minutes ago, Pryce said:

I'm using photoshop!

I strected it a bit further and enhanced local contrast to reveal some more detail and make it pop.
 

 

That worked! 👋

As a general rule, push an image too far then back off to just what the data will support. 'Always leave a bit in reserve,' is my motto. It helps make an image look relaxed even when it isn't!

Olly

[MartinB]

Oh well done Pryce, you are obviously a quick learner.  I really like the fact that you are being conservative with the processing, this is unusual when just starting out!  Also unusual is the committment to get a good amount of data.  This has really paid off and has allowed you to push thing that bit furthe with an excellent result.

On 16/01/2021 at 17:00, ollypenrice said:

That worked! 👋

As a general rule, push an image too far then back off to just what the data will support. 'Always leave a bit in reserve,' is my motto. It helps make an image look relaxed even when it isn't!

Olly

I ask Jacqui!

[ollypenrice]

12 minutes ago, MartinB said:

Oh well done Pryce, you are obviously a quick learner.  I really like the fact that you are being conservative with the processing, this is unusual when just starting out!  Also unusual is the committment to get a good amount of data.  This has really paid off and has allowed you to push thing that bit furthe with an excellent result.

I ask Jacqui!

Monique always says, 'It looks very red.' My excuse is that hydrogen's the most abundant element in the Universe but she's never conviced...

Olly

[Pryce]

It also has a lot to do with the Doppler effect.  The longer away it is, the farther the wavelengt of the light is being dragged out over distance, which redshifts it and our images(with a color camera) ends up being more red!

Edited January 20, 2021 by Pryce