NGC5907

[CCD Imager]

A lesser know edge on galaxy in Draco similar to NGC891

Taken with an SW Esprit 150mm and ASI 183. LRGB: :200:90:90:90 mins.

The galaxy has a perculair arc structure:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NGC_5907#/media/File:Ngc5907_stellar_stream.jpg

Not a hint of it in my image though despite significant stretching, obviously needs much longer exposures and a dark sky

Adrian

[Sunshine]

Wonderful image!

[Stephen Green]

Very nice image

[Mr Spock]

That's a really nice image and not a galaxy I'm familiar with. Nice one.

[George 47]

Nice image there of a not often imaged galaxy.

[tomato]

Great image, a very sharp edge on galaxy, it will be on my list for next season.

[wimvb]

Very nice. The stellar stream only shows if your last name is Gabany.

https://www.cosmotography.com/

I imaged this galaxy earlier this season, and after 10 hours I still had to use my imagination to see it in a superstretced luminance image. I never included it in the final version.

[CCD Imager]

Thank you for the kind comments.

Wim, Jay Gabany images from a very dark site hidden in the mountains in western US and uses an arc filter  Like you, he imaged for about 10 hours, so I have no chance! 

[wimvb]

Here's how far I could push the tidal stream.

and my final image:

https://www.astrobin.com/buqeoi/?nc=user

Edited May 9, 2021 by wimvb

[CCD Imager]

Yes, you defintely captured it. I tried inverting and stretching my version, but no luck.

This would make a good challenge as to who can capture it with as much detail as possible, Gabany excluded

Maybe I can add data next year

Adrian

[Spitfire]

Very nice image.

Just looked up the details on the Wiki link. If you want to reproduce something like that you need a dark site, a 0.5 m telescope and a total  exposure of 113.5 hours!

Don't think I can manage any of those.

Geoff

 

[wimvb]

Only 11.35 hours according to the publication by Gabany and Martinez-Delgado. It's the dark site that is most important here.

Edited May 10, 2021 by wimvb

[Spitfire]

I agree with you Wim that the dark site is the most important. However, the data contained in the website ( https://www.cosmotography.com/images/small_ring_ngc5907.html) download PDF documentation page 22,shows 113.5 hours, not 11.35 hours. I think the decimal place has been put in the wrong place.

Geoff

[david_taurus83]

3 hours ago, wimvb said:

Only 11.35 hours according to the publication by Gabany and Martinez-Delgado. It's the dark site that is most important here.

And the half metre mirror!

[gorann]

34 minutes ago, Spitfire said:

I agree with you Wim that the dark site is the most important. However, the data contained in the website ( https://www.cosmotography.com/images/small_ring_ngc5907.html) download PDF documentation page 22,shows 113.5 hours, not 11.35 hours. I think the decimal place has been put in the wrong place.

Geoff

It does say 11.35 h on p 5 of that pdf. Too small for my RASAs but otherwise I am sure they would have captured the stream.

[Spitfire]

My apologies exeryone. I can't add up and I have the decimal point in the wrong place.

Geoff

[wimvb]

44 minutes ago, david_taurus83 said:

And the half metre mirror!

Not necessarily so. The half meter mirror is quite slow (f/8.2). But the camera that they used has huge pixels, 9 micrometer. My previous configuration with 5.68 um pixels and an f/5.3 scope, had equivalent imaging efficiency. But at the cost of loss in detail that I could capture.

Btw, there is some controversy regarding this galaxy and its tidal stream. Using the Dragonfly telescope, Van Dokkum and co-workers also tried to catch it, with different results.

https://phys.org/news/2019-07-stellar-stream-galaxy-ngc-morphology.html

 

[wimvb]

22 minutes ago, Spitfire said:

My apologies exeryone. I can't add up and I have the decimal point in the wrong place.

Geoff

No worries. 113.5 hours images are rare, but they do exist.

It is said that for every magnitude of sky darkness that you lose, you need to multiply your integration time by 2.5. In order to show that tidal tail, we would probably need those 100+ hours.

[CCD Imager]

What is needed is a telescope with a fast Focal Ratio, a camera with high QE and a dark sky. I suspect that even a short FL scope like a RASA would pick it up.

Adrian

[wimvb]

23 minutes ago, CCD Imager said:

What is needed is a telescope with a fast Focal Ratio, a camera with high QE and a dark sky. I suspect that even a short FL scope like a RASA would pick it up.

Adrian

That would be a nice project for @gorann next season. 

But in all fairness, I think the galaxy would get lost in the wide fov

Edited May 10, 2021 by wimvb

[CCD Imager]

1 minute ago, wimvb said:

That would be a nice project for @gorann next season. 

I live in a Bortle 4 sky and could add next year. Defintely worth trying

Adrian

[gorann]

23 hours ago, wimvb said:

That would be a nice project for @gorann next season. 

But in all fairness, I think the galaxy would get lost in the wide fov

It would be small in the RASA8 but it would be there together with a few others - I will think about it (I have all the bright summer nights to think).

Edited May 11, 2021 by gorann