Multiple Telescope Image?

[Sunshine]

My curiosity needs satisfying, is it possible to combine data from one object taken by more than one telescope/user? by user I mean different imagers and not one imager with a multiple scope rig pointing at one target.  I imagine several telescopes of varying sizes, filters etc being used for one final image. If possible, would said image not be utterly cracking? In my head I picture 5 telescopes gathering data from different rigs set up for capturing different wavelengths then combining the data. I'm sure I haven't touched upon anything 🤣 my name will not go down in AP history but not being an imager, I am not privy to the challenges of such a task.

Edited March 16, 2022 by Sunshine

[vlaiv]

It is certainly possible and does not differ much from single person with multiple setups combining data.

Some of iconic images are in fact collaboration - you can find those online, for example - this one:

You can see that data from 5 different observatories was used to produce final result

[Sunshine]

9 minutes ago, vlaiv said:

It is certainly possible and does not differ much from single person with multiple setups combining data.

Some of iconic images are in fact collaboration - you can find those online, for example - this one:

You can see that data from 5 different observatories was used to produce final result

Ah! I knew I was onto something, meaning the validity of my query, I mean. 
 

Thanks!

[Annehouw]

Search for "astrobiscuit the big amateur telescope". You are not alone.

[tomato]

Yes indeed, there have been a number of excellent images involving collaborations of this kind posted recently in the Deep Sky Imaging section.

Software such as APP make this reasonably straightforward, although one difficulty combing data from more than one reflector is aligning the diffraction spikes on the stars, but I think these can be removed in software so it’s not a show stopper.

[ollypenrice]

This practice has a long history on SGL and began when the software Registar appeared on the scene. It will resize, align and combine data from any source, any pixel scale, any filter and any orientation. It will also combine them, but it is often better to move to a layers-based program in order to control the weighting and colour channel to be given to each component. There are now other programs which can do some or all of this, though I still use Registar followed by Photoshop, myself.

A long time ago we saw an SGL-based collaboration of this kind take an APOD.

As well as adding to the sheer volume of data, the technique can allow for 'areas of interest' in an image to be shot at higher resolution than the full background image. This obviates the need to shoot object-free starfields at the same resolution as the objects within it. This tends to be called 'composite imaging' and is widely used, though the writers of Pixinsight (known as The Spanish Inquisition in my house🤣) dismiss it as 'painting' and won't support it. The technique cannot be fully automated since some craftsmanship is involved in the blending but, since all the data are genuine representations of what's there, I don't agree with the Inquisitors on this! 

Below we have an image from two setups, the Triplet galaxies being shot at nearly 4x the resolution of the main field. To do this as a full resolution mosaic would have taken hundreds of hours.

 

So your hunch was a good one...

Olly

 

Edited March 17, 2022 by ollypenrice
typo

[neil phillips]

It can even be done on planets. Many years ago i remember Emil Kraaikamp using one of mine with he's. Cant remember what it looked like. But seem to remember the idea working

 

[Stu]

I guess timing is important for planetary images because of rotation, you would end up with blurred detail if the timing was too different. Not a problem for DSO obviously, unless the images are years apart for some of the faster expanding planetary Nebs etc

[neil phillips]

21 hours ago, Stu said:

I guess timing is important for planetary images because of rotation, you would end up with blurred detail if the timing was too different. Not a problem for DSO obviously, unless the images are years apart for some of the faster expanding planetary Nebs etc

Yes thats right i seem to remember some discussion about time Stu