Jump to content

Walking on the Moon

IC1805 The Heart Nebula SHO with creative crops


Astro_Gaz
 Share

Recommended Posts

First full image of the new rig in its new location, I'm really pleased to say the least 


Ha - 8.5 hours
Oiii - 5 hours
Sii - 7 hours
Total image time 19+ Hours 
IC1805 The Heart Nebula with carious crops and starless version 
Telescope - William Optics 80mm Super APO
Camera - QHY294M
Filter Wheel - QHYCFW3L (with M adapter)
Filters - Baader Ha, Optolong Sii & Oiii
Reducer - William Optics Adjustable Flat6A III 0.8x
Guiding - QHYOAG & QHY5ii
Mount - NEQ6 (Belt Mod)
Software - N.I.N.A / PHD2 / Pixinsight
Bortle - 4.5
The Heart Nebula, IC 1805, Sharpless 2-190, is some 7500 light years away from Earth and is located in the Perseus Arm of the Galaxy in the constellation Cassiopeia. It was discovered by William Herschel on 3 November 1787. It is an emission nebula showing glowing ionized hydrogen gas and darker dust lanes. 
Radius: 100 light years
Magnitude: 18.3
Distance to Earth: 7,500 light years
Coordinates: RA 2h 33m 22s | Dec +61° 26′ 36″
Constellation: Cassiopeia
Absolute magnitude (V): 6.5

IC_1805.jpg

IC_1805_starless.jpg

IC_1805_crop.jpg

IC_1805_crop_i.jpg

IC_1805_crop_ii.jpg

  • Like 22
Link to comment
Share on other sites

44 minutes ago, Astro_Gaz said:

First full image of the new rig in its new location, I'm really pleased to say the least 


Ha - 8.5 hours
Oiii - 5 hours
Sii - 7 hours
Total image time 19+ Hours 
IC1805 The Heart Nebula with carious crops and starless version 
Telescope - William Optics 80mm Super APO
Camera - QHY294M
Filter Wheel - QHYCFW3L (with M adapter)
Filters - Baader Ha, Optolong Sii & Oiii
Reducer - William Optics Adjustable Flat6A III 0.8x
Guiding - QHYOAG & QHY5ii
Mount - NEQ6 (Belt Mod)
Software - N.I.N.A / PHD2 / Pixinsight
Bortle - 4.5
The Heart Nebula, IC 1805, Sharpless 2-190, is some 7500 light years away from Earth and is located in the Perseus Arm of the Galaxy in the constellation Cassiopeia. It was discovered by William Herschel on 3 November 1787. It is an emission nebula showing glowing ionized hydrogen gas and darker dust lanes. 
Radius: 100 light years
Magnitude: 18.3
Distance to Earth: 7,500 light years
Coordinates: RA 2h 33m 22s | Dec +61° 26′ 36″
Constellation: Cassiopeia
Absolute magnitude (V): 6.5

IC_1805.jpg

IC_1805_starless.jpg

IC_1805_crop.jpg

IC_1805_crop_i.jpg

IC_1805_crop_ii.jpg

Beautiful rendition of this target, i have done this recently too, and just started with PI, can I ask what you used to remove the stars, as I used starnet 2, but found it left a few larger ones behind 

cheers

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Stuart1971 said:

Beautiful rendition of this target, i have done this recently too, and just started with PI, can I ask what you used to remove the stars, as I used starnet 2, but found it left a few larger ones behind 

cheers

Hi Mate thanks for the kind words I also used StarNet 2 I've attached a screenshot of settings, hope it works out for you  image.png.7fe37265a1124a1192cd6feba04d2ad0.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Astro_Gaz said:

That's cool, perhaps we need to team up ha ha

ha that would actually not be a bad shout I guess at some point. I'm actually "testing" my kit on this very target at the moment as I'm waiting on my permanent setup. I only just got the mono camera and filters so I'm kidding myself I'm just playing at the minute and none of it matters if I mess up 🙂 🙂

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, scotty38 said:

ha that would actually not be a bad shout I guess at some point. I'm actually "testing" my kit on this very target at the moment as I'm waiting on my permanent setup. I only just got the mono camera and filters so I'm kidding myself I'm just playing at the minute and none of it matters if I mess up 🙂 🙂

this was the first full image on this rig i had recently upgraded from the QHY9m, give me a shout if you get stuck with anything :) 

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 26/08/2022 at 19:04, Astro_Gaz said:

Yeah, I do love starless on images with lots of nebula, thank you for your kind words :) 

You're welcome. I think starless versions often give a greater sense of depth which the starfield can often hide. Possibly something to do with how we perceive depth, we expect objects to blur with distance which doesn't happen with point sources. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Those are great. The de-starring routines work really well with NB and I like your fully starless one. In broadband I'm not so sure, partly because I can't get them to work as well as you have and partly, perhaps, because broadband seeks to be 'natural.'

Either way, once you have a perfectly de-starred image you have absolute control over the starfield, which is an incredible step forward in astro-image processing.

Olly

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 hours ago, Knight of Clear Skies said:

You're welcome. I think starless versions often give a greater sense of depth which the starfield can often hide. Possibly something to do with how we perceive depth, we expect objects to blur with distance which doesn't happen with point sources. 

Hi Olly, totally agree mate, I'm even toying with the idea of shooting the stars in RGB then adding them back in but might try that on the next image rather than a re visit on this one :)

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Astro_Gaz said:

Strange, the only thing I could think is maybe It's down to resolution? Just checking it's not a JPEG that you're trying it on? 

 

No, I did it at the correct time and in the correct image and it worked perfectly just left about 4 of the bigger stars behind…whereas yours has removed every one…

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, MartinB said:

Well you have certainly nailed that!  Good data very nicely processed.  I like your colour management leaving in some green.  Proper Hubble palate.

Thanks, Martin, yes I've never understood taking all the green out, I believe it complements the image and gives it a tad more depth 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 29/08/2022 at 10:06, Stuart1971 said:

No, I did it at the correct time and in the correct image and it worked perfectly just left about 4 of the bigger stars behind…whereas yours has removed every one…

If you send a high-res version of yours to me, I'd be more than happy to run it through mine to see if it removes them for you? If so, please let me know and ill dm you my email address 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue. By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.