Jump to content

Banner.jpg.b89429c566825f6ab32bcafbada449c9.jpg

M81/2 and very little Integrated Flux!

ollypenrice

By ollypenrice
in Imaging - Deep Sky

Recommended Posts

ollypenrice

ollypenrice

Posted
Posted

This turned out to be a bit of an epic having started innocently enough. Despite 8 hours of Luminance in 10 minute subs the Flux remains scarcely visible. The colour is wishy washy on M82 so I went for a lot, 105 minutes per channel, binned. So 13.5 hours so far.

Ha and possibly another assault on the Flux still to come.

TEC 5.5 inch triplet apo/Atik 4000 mono/EM200.

RGB and L layers were done in two stretches, the short stars/cores being Layer Masked onto the full stretches. Background and colour calibration courtesy of PixInsight. Thanks as ever to Harry. I'm trying for a softer look in my Galaxy processing. Any good?

Olly

Fullsize here; Galaxies - ollypenrice's Photos

1211863531_iXuC5-X2.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • Replies 27
  • Created
  • Last Reply
ollypenrice

ollypenrice

Posted
  • Author
Posted

I agree Peter. I could get more out but I have a low tolerance of noise. I stacked and calibrated in AstroArt and tried with and without PIs background tools. Then it was a stretch in Ps, the usual Levels and Curves. Any ideas?

It does look a bit more clipped on SmugMug than in Ps, I must say.

In part it is the f7 of the TEC and maybe I just need longer subs. I'll give it a go. In for a penny...

Olly

Link to comment
Share on other sites
ollypenrice

ollypenrice

Posted
  • Author
Posted

Patient, me? I stomp around the mount growling Hurry up you ruddy backsliding, snail-crawling dawdling oaf, I could push a peanut up Winnats Pass with my nose faster than that... Etc etc!

As for what I would do to Bill Gates when software hangs up, well, Joan of Arc got off lightly, I tell Monique...

I did everything, stacking, calibration and RGB combining in Bin2 then resized the final Tiff for export into Ps and PI. I did a couple of star reduction routines on the larger binned RGB stars before adding the Lum. No issues with binning this time, I don't think, though I prefer not to do it.

Olly

Link to comment
Share on other sites
peter shah

peter shah

Posted
Posted
I agree Peter. I could get more out but I have a low tolerance of noise. I stacked and calibrated in AstroArt and tried with and without PIs background tools. Then it was a stretch in Ps, the usual Levels and Curves. Any ideas?

It does look a bit more clipped on SmugMug than in Ps, I must say.

In part it is the f7 of the TEC and maybe I just need longer subs. I'll give it a go. In for a penny...

Olly

my camera hasnt got set point cooling, i couldnt get my darks to match up with the lights so when i was calibrating they were removing signal....so ive dropped doing darks and just do a hot pixel removal.....also i stack using average rather than SD mask, this allowed me to push the curves more.

but F/7 doesnt help with this faint stuff

worth trying

Link to comment
Share on other sites
ollypenrice

ollypenrice

Posted
  • Author
Posted

Thanks Peter, I will look into hot pixel maps.

With a bit more tolerance of noise I can get this far, though I don't like it. More data, as ever:

1211925182_4CMWy-X2.jpg

Olly

PS Edit, Ouch, this looks awful on SmugMug. It looks way better in PS. Odd.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
TakMan

TakMan

Posted
Posted

Looks great Ollie.... like the subtle processing technique that you've decided upon as the whole frame appears quite balanced....

Was also wondering on the lack of flux though... perhaps as you/Peter mentioned it's the f7 rather than Mr Shah's f3. something !

As for the colour issues when uploading, did you see Yfronto/Mike's tip in a previous thread - MartinB's 'Leo triplet luminence', which has sorted that particular issue for me... I think!

Clear skies!

Damian

Link to comment
Share on other sites
pietervdv

pietervdv

Posted
Posted

Cracking shot Olly, just keep on going with the luminance. (you can never have enough of that)

Not trying to kill you but... Some long H-alpha exposures would really complement the galaxies in this.

regards,

Pieter

Link to comment
Share on other sites
vdb

vdb

Posted
Posted

Super shot Olly!

Why not go long for the flux like 30 min sub exposures ... I'm sure the EM 200 can handle it, as I do it with the IEQ45, granted not so much load :-)

I have seen some with 6 min subs and a not super fast system (f4.8 ...which would equal to around 15 min at f7.5)

Yves.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
peter shah

peter shah

Posted
Posted
sorry to sound stupid but what's integrated flux? is it what powered the De Lorean?

integrated flux is high nebula and dust in our galaxy, it spead over a very wide area and glows from light reflected from many stars....galactic cirrus is another name for it.....someone else might have a more detailed explanation but thats how i understand it

Link to comment
Share on other sites
ollypenrice

ollypenrice

Posted
  • Author
Posted
sorry to sound stupid but what's integrated flux? is it what powered the De Lorean?

It is this stuff, captured here by my robotic neighbour Karel Teuwen...

Karel Teuwen

Well, Karel is not robotic but you know what I mean! The name comes from the fact that the tenuous nebulosity is illuminated by the integrated starlight of the Milky Way rather than by a discrete star or cluster. It is faint but MartinB got it here last year. I am going to machine gun the stuff at f2.8 in the Canon lens but I will have it!!!!

Olly.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • 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.