NGC 7129 LRGB

[Rodd]

I wish my sky was more condusive to imaging relatively faint nebula is faint but complex surroundings.  Its a spectacular little nebula, though embedded in a difficult field of dust, emissions, and stars.  This is almost 20 hours and I could use 3x that.  A fast system in a dark sky would really produce an amazing result.  There are several very fine red filaments either in the red channel and too dim for me to pick uop, or the Ha channel, which I have not had teh chance to acquire. If they are in Ha, it will be worth collecting it as they resemble tentacles of a krakren.  We'll see.  I might cut my losses and move on to brighter targets more suitabe for my locxatrion.

TOA 130 with .99x flattener and ASI 1600.  About 20 hours LRGB (5 hours of Lum).  Bin2 was the only option, really, though this little gem really does deserve to be viewed at full resolution.

 

 

 

Edited August 20 by Rodd

[Rodd]

Reprocess.  This nebula becomes gaudy with the tiniest of sudtleties

 

 

Edited August 20 by Rodd

[Clarkey]

Nice result. I managed about 10 hours on this target some time ago, but got little more than a smudge. I might have to try reprocessing now I am a bit better with PI.

Just out of interest, can I ask where CT is? You seem to get quite a bit of clear sky, so I am assuming it is not in the UK.

[Rodd]

4 hours ago, Clarkey said:

Nice result. I managed about 10 hours on this target some time ago, but got little more than a smudge. I might have to try reprocessing now I am a bit better with PI.

Just out of interest, can I ask where CT is? You seem to get quite a bit of clear sky, so I am assuming it is not in the UK.

Wow. You think I get a lot of clear sky?  2-3 days per month? (Usually when moon is bright). I feel sorry for you. You must be ensconced in a permanent cloud bank. It sucks, doesn’t it? 

CT is in New England USA. About 1.5 hours from New York City. (Right beneath the jet stream!)

[CCD-Freak]

Nice image.

Yeah Rod....I hear you about being under the jet stream.  My dark site in west Texas often has the "jet" parked right over it.  I shot this 4 hour image of NGC7129 with an ES 127ED and an ASI2600MC last year.  My image has way more star bloat and less resolution of the details in the nebulosity but the dust in the background is just starting to come out.  

I plan to try this object again sometime soon.   I may also try reprocessing the data again. 

Edited August 21 by CCD-Freak

[Clarkey]

6 hours ago, Rodd said:

You must be ensconced in a permanent cloud bank. It sucks, doesn’t it? 

Cloud, rain, jet stream, light pollution, security lights.....

This year I have been relying on a syndicate rig in Spain. Let's hope the current imaging season is better than the last.

[Rodd]

2 hours ago, Clarkey said:

Cloud, rain, jet stream, light pollution, security lights.....

This year I have been relying on a syndicate rig in Spain. Let's hope the current imaging season is better than the last.

I wish I had a syndicate rig.  If I don’t collect the data, though, I don’t get the same enjoyment

[Rodd]

5 hours ago, CCD-Freak said:

Nice image.

Yeah Rod....I hear you about being under the jet stream.  My dark site in west Texas often has the "jet" parked right over it.  I shot this 4 hour image of NGC7129 with an ES 127ED and an ASI2600MC last year.  My image has way more star bloat and less resolution of the details in the nebulosity but the dust in the background is just starting to come out.  

I plan to try this object again sometime soon.   I may also try reprocessing the data again. 

Looks good. My background is just terrible. I have red/ magenta patches too. I guess that is correct.  Mine looked wrong though, so I got rid of them

[Clarkey]

9 hours ago, Rodd said:

If I don’t collect the data, though, I don’t get the same enjoyment

I found the same thing too. I have done a year as a trial. Although I have got some great images, I do not get the same satisfaction as collecting the data myself. I think last year was just so bad here, I was desperate for something.

 

Having seen your version, I went back and re-processed my data for NGC 7129 from last year. The result is certainly better than my previous 'smudge', but still needs some more integration time. This was in HaLRGB with the 1600MM pro and RC8 @ F6 - about 11 hours total.

[Rodd]

14 hours ago, Clarkey said:

I found the same thing too. I have done a year as a trial. Although I have got some great images, I do not get the same satisfaction as collecting the data myself. I think last year was just so bad here, I was desperate for something.

 

Having seen your version, I went back and re-processed my data for NGC 7129 from last year. The result is certainly better than my previous 'smudge', but still needs some more integration time. This was in HaLRGB with the 1600MM pro and RC8 @ F6 - about 11 hours total.

That looks great. The background is smooth, not chunky like mine. Maybe I stretched too aggressively. Collect some more data and you’ll have a great image

[Rodd]

I added 3.5 hours of Ha.  Not sure its worth it.  there is very little Ha in the nebula.  For wide field shots it looks good in the backgrounbd, but for smaller FOVs, it is blotchy.  I didn't do a very good job with it, but there was precious little to do anything with.

 

[Rodd]

Gaudy baudy....terrible.  I am at my wits end.  I blame it on teh sky, but  who knows.  The goal herae was to tame it

 

[Crispy5573]

I got about 6 hours on this during the summer (with no astro dark) in RGB with my RCOS 12.5 f/9 RC, QHY268M and anltia LRGB-V Pro filters. Still have a problem with stars flaring (like extra diffraction spikes) but I'm trying not to be paranoid about it

[Rodd]

23 minutes ago, Crispy5573 said:

(like extra diffraction spikes) but I'm trying not to be paranoid about it

Even without astro dark your background is better than mine.  Either my sky is worse than I thought, my gear is not as good as it should be, or it's me.  Maybe all 3.  The regular diffraction spikes in your stars look normal--it's the flary ones that give ne pause.  Then again, bright stars in Hubble images are terrible,,,kind of look the same (worse).  The less bright stars are fine.  It would bother me if it was not expected.  The flares are not symmetrical...could it be tilt or collimation?  

[Crispy5573]

4 minutes ago, Rodd said:

Even without astro dark your background is better than mine.  Either my sky is worse than I thought, my gear is not as good as it should be, or it's me.  Maybe all 3.  The regular diffraction spikes in your stars look normal--it's the flary ones that give ne pause.  Then again, bright stars in Hubble images are terrible,,,kind of look the same (worse).  The less bright stars are fine.  It would bother me if it was not expected.  The flares are not symmetrical...could it be tilt or collimation?  

I don't know what's causing it Rodd. I've collimated the heck out of it CCD inspector shows so flat that I don't want to touch it. I need to take out the OAG prism and see if that makes a difference but it's only on the larger stars. It doesn't show up on other images that have no large or particularly bright stars. The background is the part I like most about this image so thank you

[TiffsAndAstro]

There is a thickish "flair" between the two left side spikes on every star. Has to be focus tube obstruction surely?

It also varies based more on stars position in frame.

Apologies for interjecting, I'm trying to improve my Newtonian diagnostics

[Crispy5573]

9 minutes ago, TiffsAndAstro said:

There is a thickish "flair" between the two left side spikes on every star. Has to be focus tube obstruction surely?

It also varies based more on stars position in frame.

Apologies for interjecting, I'm trying to improve my Newtonian diagnostics

No problem. Mine is an RC but same principle as far as this problem goes. 

[TiffsAndAstro]

Just now, Crispy5573 said:

No problem. Mine is an RC but same principle as far as this problem goes. 

Fml  more apologies.

Did you add cosmetic spikes?

[Crispy5573]

1 minute ago, Crispy5573 said:

No problem. Mine is an RC but same principle as far as this problem goes. 

Also it is secondary mirror focusing so just a straight tube but it could be slightly misaligned. 

[Crispy5573]

1 minute ago, TiffsAndAstro said:

Fml  more apologies.

Did you add cosmetic spikes?

No it's an RC so real spikes lol

[TiffsAndAstro]

Just now, Crispy5573 said:

No it's an RC so real spikes lol

Apologies again for the dumbness and interrupting 

[Crispy5573]

Just now, TiffsAndAstro said:

Apologies again for the dumbness and interrupting 

No worries Tiff people who don't ask questions very rarely learn anything so nothing dumb about it.

 

[Rodd]

I think I have finallly found the fairway!!!  To bad its 800 yards to the pin

[900SL]

Thanks for posting these, great to see the variety