Jump to content

Banner2.jpg.35fd74882a15b2b8a1b4142f7dcc8bed.jpg

Dust in Auriga - a quite boring image


gorann
 Share

Recommended Posts

Unfortunately this turned out to be a rather boring image. I saw some structure in this area when surfing in Aladin Sky Atlas and hoped for some interesting Ha and Oiii signals there so I used the NBZ filter. However, it ended up to be rather colourless. The dust structures may not have any designations and the plate-solve on Astrobin only found stars to designate. I assume what we are looking at is IFN (Integrated Flux Nebulosity) and I am a bit impressed that it was picked up by the NBZ filter, but then the RASA8-ASI2600MC is a very effective combo.

Imaged with a dual-RASA8 rig with ASI2600MC and IDAS NBZ filter. All on a Mesu 200. 122 x 5 min, so 10.2 hours. Processed in PI and PS (Starless of course before bringing the stars back).

 

Cheers, Göran

20220920 NGC1883 RASA1+2 PS18smallSign.jpg

Screenshot 2022-09-22 at 12.37.12.png

  • Like 8
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not entirely boring. You have a tiny supernova  in the image. It's in the fuzzy patch approximately mid between HD 38287 and HD 38449. The fuzzy patch is galaxy 2MFGC 4706. The SN has id SN 2003hz. The galaxy is roughly 270-300 Mly distant

Right next to star HD 39044 there is also a very interesting pair of interacting galaxies

MCG+08-11-010

UZC J055212.3+465020

 

Edited by wimvb
  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think we have different definitions of boring...

Accidental IFN capture? Definitely not boring. Maybe visually not that striking, but fairly interesting still. I do wonder how dramatic the structures would become without the NBZ filter though, as if its just IFN there should be loads more signal without the filter.

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, ONIKKINEN said:

I think we have different definitions of boring...

Accidental IFN capture? Definitely not boring. Maybe visually not that striking, but fairly interesting still. I do wonder how dramatic the structures would become without the NBZ filter though, as if its just IFN there should be loads more signal without the filter.

Thanks and Yes, I think the same - could have been quite an image without the NBZ filters. So I wonder if I should give it a go whenever the sky clears again - but no prospects of that in the current weather report for the next week......

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Reminds me of days long ago school chemistry making iron (III) hydroxide. It’s not boring and it’s certainly quite a technical feat to capture it in such depth and  detail, but I can’t help labelling it IGC, or Inter Galactic Crud.😉
 

 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, gorann said:

Thanks so much Wim for finding something interesting here!
I am off to bed now but I will follow your leads tomorrow👍

Maybe something to follow up with your "galaxstudsare"?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, wimvb said:

Not entirely boring. You have a tiny supernova  in the image. It's in the fuzzy patch approximately mid between HD 38287 and HD 38449. The fuzzy patch is galaxy 2MFGC 4706. The SN has id SN 2003hz. The galaxy is roughly 270-300 Mly distant

Right next to star HD 39044 there is also a very interesting pair of interacting galaxies

MCG+08-11-010

UZC J055212.3+465020

 

Here are two crops of the galaxies found by Wim. So not entirely boring. And clearly there are even more galaxies there:

20220920 NGC1883 RASA2 PS5c(galazy 2MFGC 4706).jpg

 

20220920 NGC1883 RASA1+2 galaxies.jpg

Edited by gorann
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, ollypenrice said:

Might there be a whiff of something unusual creeping into the image from the bottom edge, half way along? Slight patch of nebulosity, redder on the right, bluer on the left?

Olly

Yes, I noticed that and I have to check that it is not an artifact from the oil I just noticed were creeping up on the sensor on one of the cameras. It is the second time it happened to that camera and I will have to send it to TS again🥴. So I will have to have a closer look on the data from the camera that is ok.

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.