I actually got very good seeing last night (better than 2.1 arcsec FWHM average across all subs)! Alas, I fiddle-farted around for over 2 hours early in the night getting the composition right and recovering from a couple of software crashes. Then I only got 2.5 hours of Lum before thick fog came in (very annoying because that's rare around here). Anyway, it's looking very good and I was surprised by it's beautifully intricate structure and tonality because not many renditions, except for the ESO 2.2m version - at full res, show it well. The filaments within the jelly fish at top right look amazing.
BUT, this is only 45% full scale to hide noise from the low integration time and artefacts from my quick, preliminary processing. I can tell you though, full res is looking pretty spectacular ... but I'll hold off posting that though until I get more Lum and add RGB and probably NB.
There is some really nice filamentry detail showing up, looking forward to the final product. Hope you're getting better skies than melb, otherwise you'll never get there haha
Looks very good to me Marcus. Looking forward to the final result.
Cheers
Steve
Cheers Steve! Me too! Hope the seeing is as good next session!
Quote:
Originally Posted by alpal
Looks great Marcus ,
that's sharp & clear.
I can't wait to see the RGB too.
cheers
Allan
Thankyou Allan! The scaling down helps too but it does hint at the clarity at full res. If I can get another session with as-good conditions I'll post at full res.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Peter Ward
Wow. Simply excellent as is. It can only get better
Cheers Peter! Not bad for a mere 14" eh?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Atmos
There is some really nice filamentry detail showing up, looking forward to the final product. Hope you're getting better skies than melb, otherwise you'll never get there haha
Thanks Colin! Yes, I was blown over by the structure of this beastie. I've got everything crossed for another good long session but weather here sucks most of the time. Whenever I get a night of clear stable conditions it feels like Christmas!!
Quote:
Originally Posted by gregbradley
Terrific sharp details and pinpoint stars. You must be happy with that.
Greg.
Thanks a lot Greg! Scaling down always helps make things look crisp but, seeing permitting, the final full res should be impressive, especially after decon. At 2 arcsec seeing (what I consider "good to very good" around here) I'm oversampling enough for decon to work well.
Quote:
Originally Posted by RickS
Looks great, Marcus!
Thanks Rick!
Quote:
Originally Posted by multiweb
Incredible shot Marcus. Best cat paw I've seen to date. ESO's got nothing on yours.
You're too kind Marc - thanks mate! I did notice that the full res ESO shot is a bit noisy, but look past that and the detail is gorgeous. I'll get close to it but of course a 2.2m will always win!
That's already delightful, Marcus. One of the few emission nebulae that look good in luminance as opposed to H-alpha. Makes the stars sparkle.
We've always seen the jellyfish at top right as being a barbecued chicken seen from above, complete with drumsticks and Parson's Nose, with the fine filamentary structure you've captured so well being the crispy skin. But it could also be a jellyfish. That fits with the very obvious shark's fin at 8 o'clock to the jellyfish.
That's already delightful, Marcus. One of the few emission nebulae that look good in luminance as opposed to H-alpha. Makes the stars sparkle.
We've always seen the jellyfish at top right as being a barbecued chicken seen from above, complete with drumsticks and Parson's Nose, with the fine filamentary structure you've captured so well being the crispy skin. But it could also be a jellyfish. That fits with the very obvious shark's fin at 8 o'clock to the jellyfish.
Excellent!
Thanks very much M&T!! Barbeque chook eh? I'll take your word for it! I didn't see the shark fin until you told me. I saw a star trek insignia instead - I guess that's very telling of my Star Trek fan status!
Quote:
Originally Posted by cometcatcher
That's really very sharp Marcus! My wife reckons that's a crocodile on the top left lol.
I've started this one too a few nights ago but the cloud keeps wrecking progress.
Thanks Kevin! OK, a crocodile - why not! I can see that now!
Quote:
Originally Posted by strongmanmike
Yes looking quite speccy Marcus So are you saying to Greg above there is no decon used on this yet? It looks like Ha ...seeing rules!
Mike
Cheers Mike!
To clarify. I do bicubic sampling when registering my subs and that always increases FWHM a bit (in this case from 2.0 to 2.1 for the subs to 2.26 for the stack). To compensate for this AND to tighten up the stars (because I'm always oversampling) I always decon in CCDStack. In the first instance I decon'ed the stars only by dropping the signal level (Pixel math) so only stars are affected by the decon. This dropped FWHM to 1.8 and did not noticeably affect the neb or sharpen noise. I usually always do different decons too and layer them in PS. For example, when I have more data I'll also (gently) decon to include the neb and layer that decon'ed neb in PS. Oh yes, and I did do some contrast enhancement on the neb in PS too.
Bottom line - I always decon and if you're not decon'ing your oversampled data - you're not processing your data fully IMO! Of course, if I had 1 arcsec seeing decon probably wouldn't be necessary.
To clarify. I do bicubic sampling when registering my subs and that always increases FWHM a bit (in this case from 2.0 to 2.1 for the subs to 2.26 for the stack). To compensate for this AND to tighten up the stars (because I'm always oversampling) I always decon in CCDStack. In the first instance I decon'ed the stars only by dropping the signal level (Pixel math) so only stars are affected by the decon. This dropped FWHM to 1.8 and did not noticeably affect the neb or sharpen noise. I usually always do different decons too and layer them in PS. For example, when I have more data I'll also (gently) decon to include the neb and layer that decon'ed neb in PS. Oh yes, and I did do some contrast enhancement on the neb in PS too.
Bottom line - I always decon and if you're not decon'ing your oversampled data - you're not processing your data fully IMO! Of course, if I had 1 arcsec seeing decon probably wouldn't be necessary.
Oh I agree and follow a similar processing approach (but no pixel Math or is that "Maths" ) and I decon (nearly) all the time too, I just thought your reply to Greg suggested you might be saving the decon for the final version, was just asking as it looks nice and crisp .
Hope the seeing is as good next session!
...seeing rules! 
