Fish Head Nebula (IC 1795)

[Adam1234]

My first pass at the Fish Head nebula (IC 1795), part of the much larger Heart Nebula in Cassiopeia. 

My intention is to undertake my biggest astro project so far and do a 4 pane mosaic to capture the whole of the Heart. It may take a while for me to get panes 2 - 4, so here is pane 1. 

Ha = 60 x 300s (5hr)

Oiii = 62 x 300s (5.2hr)

 

c&c welcome!

Thanks

Adam

[scotty38]

Lovely image that is. Is it cropped at all as I can get much more in with my 80mm and 294? Just curious....

[maw lod qan]

Incredible!

10 hours of imaging. Did you get that 10 hours in one session or was it several nights?

I am so, befuddled would be the best way to describe my thinking when I see these massive times put in on camera time!

[Adam1234]

20 minutes ago, scotty38 said:

Lovely image that is. Is it cropped at all as I can get much more in with my 80mm and 294? Just curious....

Thanks!

Yeah it is cropped a little - a bit more than would be desired, but not by a significant amount.

I think the sensor on the 294 is slightly larger on the long side and slightly smaller on the short side, than the 1600

[Adam1234]

8 minutes ago, maw lod qan said:

Incredible!

10 hours of imaging. Did you get that 10 hours in one session or was it several nights?

I am so, befuddled would be the best way to describe my thinking when I see these massive times put in on camera time!

Thanks!! I got it over 3 nights (could have done it in 2 nights but my power tank ran out of battery on one of the nights).

[TakMan]

Looking great - a positive start to a nice little project (even if it takes until next year!)

D

[Adam1234]

Here's my second pass at processing - I think I prefer this one, what do you folks think?

 

[geeklee]

12 hours ago, Adam1234 said:

what do you folks think?

Super image again Adam.  I prefer the added touch of stronger OIII but the Noise Reduction (NR) reduction looks a little stronger here - personal preference of course, but I thought the NR in the first, with a little grain, was fine.  Maybe somewhere in between on NR?

It looks great at full resolution and should make a cracking final mosaic in 2030 when you get the skies 😉 😅   One thing to keep an eye on is some of the brighter stars, they have some small artefacts around them, perhaps from Starnet?

[Adam1234]

Thanks for the comments! If I go for a third attempt (which I'm sure I will, I'll maybe go a bit easy on the ACDNR on the Ha, or skip it altogether- I had already used Mure Denoise and EZ Denoise Script and it already rather clean before I done ACDNR after stretching.

26 minutes ago, geeklee said:

It looks great at full resolution and should make a cracking final mosaic in 2030 when you get the skies 😉 😅   

🤣🤣🤣🤣

 

27 minutes ago, geeklee said:

Super image again Adam.  I prefer the added touch of stronger OIII but the Noise Reduction (NR) reduction looks a little stronger here - personal preference of course, but I thought the NR in the first, with a little grain, was fine.  Maybe somewhere in between on NR?

It looks great at full resolution and should make a cracking final mosaic in 2030 when you get the skies 😉 😅   One thing to keep an eye on is some of the brighter stars, they have some small artefacts around them, perhaps from Starnet?

Yeah they are from starnet, from the Oiii data. The Ha starless was really clean, no artefacts at all. I always have trouble with halos on the Oiii filter (ZWO 7nm)

[Rodd]

Great resolution--deatils are superb.