IC59 - Ghost of Cassiopeia

[Budgie1]

I'm not sure if this is a work in progress or whether I've completed it for now. If I get more clear nights then I may add some more data to see what else I can bring out in it but there are other targets I want to start on while they're in a good position for me.

This is IC59, Ghost of Cassiopeia, taken over two nights - 32x300s on 10th Sept & 11x180s on 26th Sept, giving a total of 3h13m of exposure. Not much for this object but it's all I've managed so far and they were both far from ideal nights. The first had passing high cloud and Moon, the second passing low cloud before clouding over completely. 

The Image was taken with an ASI294MC Pro at -10°C, gain 200, offset 30 & fitted with an L-eNhance filter. The scope was an Evostar 100ED DS Pro with 0.85 FF/FR on HEQ5.

Image stacked & processed in PI, using the GHS script for the stretch to try & control Navi as best as I could. It did quite a good job but the high cloud from the first night has given it a nice halo.

Of the two sessions, I think the data I got from the 180s exposures was better, but whether that's from better seeing or less glare from Navi, I'm not sure. If I decide to get more data then I think I'll continue with the 180s exposures and see what happens.

Overall I'm quite pleased with the results to date as it's not an easy target to image or process.

C&C's welcome.

[Budgie1]

I gave this another 63 minutes last night, 180s exposures again, and stacked all three nights together. I think it's made a vast improvement.

 

[MartinB]

Well I much prefer the first one!!  It is a beautiful atmospheric image with a lovely delicacy that the second image lacks, there is just a hint of green in the background which SCNR would fix in an instant.  

[Budgie1]

1 hour ago, MartinB said:

Well I much prefer the first one!!  It is a beautiful atmospheric image with a lovely delicacy that the second image lacks, there is just a hint of green in the background which SCNR would fix in an instant.  

I do see what you mean, Martin, but the extra data allowed more detail in the nebula and better control of the star. I did use SCNR on the green, but I don't like to remove it all, in this case I think I removed 60%, just because of what it does to the red & blue in the background.

I may give it another go, only this time be a bit more picky when going through the subs and really go for quality, rather then a few "that'll be okay" to bump up the data. This will probably remove most of the 300s subs from the first night, because of the think high cloud, but I'll see what comes out.