2 Hours on the California Nebula

[Grant93]

Hello everyone!

Always posting away in the getting started with imaging forum, felt its about time to be brave enough to post here 😅. I hope its a worthy image. A bit of a story - Had this 135mm Lens for a while, not fully understanding or appreciating how fast it was, I use to think my backyard skys were too polluted for it, I use to stop it down considerably so I could get 'longer exposures' without overexposing the histogram. I don't know how or when it hit me how silly this was, but I finally understood the love of RASA's and the fact you don't need them long exposure times, just open the damn thing up and shoot for as long as it doesn't overexpose, whether thats 20 seconds or 120!

It didnt dissapoint, this is probably my second or third cleanest image to date, but with 2-4 hours less total exposure, because this was shot at f2.8 compared to f4-f5. After the first result of processing, I was impressed and wanted more data to try and bring faint dusty regions out around it, sadly I think I've failed at that. I added another 2 and a half hours data, but it doesn't seem any easier to process, and even added difficult gradients, I will try scouring through the images, getting rid of bad ones and restacking on the weekend. However I am too eager to hold my image back as it is one I am rather proud of considering it contains less than 2 hours data, unguided and not dithered (This will change by christmas ).

I am rather happy that I managed to pull out some dusty regions to the top right and bottom left - Will a few hours more intergration time be able to pull out a lot more from a bortle 5? Or do we need 20 hours+ for that dusty detail from a bortle 5?

EDIT: Please please please, give me plenty of constructive criticism

Heres the details;

Modded 600D

SGP

Samyang 135mm @F2.8 (Heard it was sharper than F2.0)

150 Lights @ 45 seconds

20 of each caliberation frame.

Edited December 2, 2021 by Grant93

[Allinthehead]

That looks great. The only feedback I'd offer is to keep adding more data and you won't need so much noise reduction. I would aim for at least 5 hours, Ideally more. I find my images come alive after about 5 hours of data. That Samyang is a wonderful little lens.

[Pompey Monkey]

35 minutes ago, Grant93 said:

Hello everyone!

Always posting away in the getting started with imaging forum, felt its about time to be brave enough to post here 😅. I hope its a worthy image. A bit of a story - Had this 135mm Lens for a while, not fully understanding or appreciating how fast it was, I use to think my backyard skys were too polluted for it, I use to stop it down considerably so I could get 'longer exposures' without overexposing the histogram. I don't know how or when it hit me how silly this was, but I finally understood the love of RASA's and the fact you don't need them long exposure times, just open the damn thing up and shoot for as long as it doesn't overexpose, whether thats 20 seconds or 120!

It didnt dissapoint, this is probably my second or third cleanest image to date, but with 2-4 hours less total exposure, because this was shot at f2.8 compared to f4-f5. After the first result of processing, I was impressed and wanted more data to try and bring faint dusty regions out around it, sadly I think I've failed at that. I added another 2 and a half hours data, but it doesn't seem any easier to process, and even added difficult gradients, I will try scouring through the images, getting rid of bad ones and restacking on the weekend. However I am too eager to hold my image back as it is one I am rather proud of considering it contains less than 2 hours data, unguided and not dithered (This will change by christmas ).

I am rather happy that I managed to pull out some dusty regions to the top right and bottom left - Will a few hours more intergration time be able to pull out a lot more from a bortle 5? Or do we need 20 hours+ for that dusty detail from a bortle 5?

EDIT: Please please please, give me plenty of constructive criticism

Heres the details;

Modded 600D

SGP

Samyang 135mm @F2.8 (Heard it was sharper than F2.0)

150 Lights @ 45 seconds

20 of each caliberation frame.

 

You have some nioce data going on.

A quick ABE and a (small) stretch in Pixinsight:

 

Edited December 2, 2021 by Pompey Monkey
Wheredid the picture go? lol

[Grant93]

36 minutes ago, Pompey Monkey said:

You have some nioce data going on.

A quick ABE and a (small) stretch in Pixinsight:

A really nice change! Brought out a lot more of the background! Thank you!

[Pompey Monkey]

18 minutes ago, Grant93 said:

A really nice change! Brought out a lot more of the background! Thank you!

You are welcome.

Processing image data is not easy for me. I am only learing how to "see" what is going on in an image after over five years!

The technical side of aquisition is totally clear to me, as I have an engineering background.

However, knowing what to do with the data to make a nice image is a struggle for me. I'm getting there. lol.

Patience is soooo important in this hobby, as there is so much to learn, but you will be rewarded if you persevere!

You are off to a great start :)

[Clarkey]

3 hours ago, Allinthehead said:

That looks great. The only feedback I'd offer is to keep adding more data and you won't need so much noise reduction.

Definitely agree with this sentiment. More data will give a cleaner and more detailed image. Cleaner data is also easier to process.

WRT the gradients, this is really something best dealt with in the software. Obviously there is PI but I use APP which also has very good gradient removal tools. You don't say what you use to process, but the right tools certainly help. (The 'right tool's is another whole debate).

Great image. Keep going and keep posting.

[The Lazy Astronomer]

4 hours ago, Grant93 said:

Hello everyone!

Always posting away in the getting started with imaging forum, felt its about time to be brave enough to post here 😅. I hope its a worthy image. A bit of a story - Had this 135mm Lens for a while, not fully understanding or appreciating how fast it was, I use to think my backyard skys were too polluted for it, I use to stop it down considerably so I could get 'longer exposures' without overexposing the histogram. I don't know how or when it hit me how silly this was, but I finally understood the love of RASA's and the fact you don't need them long exposure times, just open the damn thing up and shoot for as long as it doesn't overexpose, whether thats 20 seconds or 120!

It didnt dissapoint, this is probably my second or third cleanest image to date, but with 2-4 hours less total exposure, because this was shot at f2.8 compared to f4-f5. After the first result of processing, I was impressed and wanted more data to try and bring faint dusty regions out around it, sadly I think I've failed at that. I added another 2 and a half hours data, but it doesn't seem any easier to process, and even added difficult gradients, I will try scouring through the images, getting rid of bad ones and restacking on the weekend. However I am too eager to hold my image back as it is one I am rather proud of considering it contains less than 2 hours data, unguided and not dithered (This will change by christmas ).

I am rather happy that I managed to pull out some dusty regions to the top right and bottom left - Will a few hours more intergration time be able to pull out a lot more from a bortle 5? Or do we need 20 hours+ for that dusty detail from a bortle 5?

EDIT: Please please please, give me plenty of constructive criticism

Heres the details;

Modded 600D

SGP

Samyang 135mm @F2.8 (Heard it was sharper than F2.0)

150 Lights @ 45 seconds

20 of each caliberation frame.

53 minutes ago, Clarkey said:

Definitely agree with this sentiment. More data will give a cleaner and more detailed image. Cleaner data is also easier to process.

WRT the gradients, this is really something best dealt with in the software. Obviously there is PI but I use APP which also has very good gradient removal tools. You don't say what you use to process, but the right tools certainly help. (The 'right tool's is another whole debate).

Great image. Keep going and keep posting.

From the look of it, I'm taking a punt at Startools having been the software used. It tends to give darker backgrounds than other software, but the wipe module usually works really well, so I'd be surprised if it wasn't effective at removing any gradients in the background. 

@Grant93: assuming you did use Startools, did you make use of the superstructure module at all? I found that it can sometimes create the appearance of fairly aggressive noise reduction.

[Grant93]

5 hours ago, The Lazy Astronomer said:

@Grant93: assuming you did use Startools, did you make use of the superstructure module at all? I found that it can sometimes create the appearance of fairly aggressive noise reduction.

Yes I did use Startools.. I can't fully remember as I did this process last weekend.. but if I do use Superstructure now days, I'll usually lower the aggressiveness a significant amount. 😀 I should of mentioned it was processed with StarTools in the post, I forgot sorry!