My first attempt was only 20 minutes of data and I hadn't done any colour calibration as all I wanted to do was show off the faint dust in field. I've now bumped it up to a whopping 1.3 hours of exposure
I've actually done some proper processing this time though and left my laptop screaming for a lot of it. Happy with the result though, not sure there is much more I can add to it apart from getting a stronger separation of the dust from the background. I've tried to keep the dynamic range as accurate as I could do the dust isn't too bright but it is visible.
I've also, using PixelMath, tried to resolve down to the core of Omega Centauri without flattening the image with true HDR. I am still playing with CFA Drizzle Integration and not getting the results I'd like, I may have to start playing with different debayering methods. Even with 22 subs I am still getting bayer colour speckle suggesting that it is struggling to get an accurate drizzle calculation. Does it whether I do 8 images or 22 so there is some more research.
As a widefield study of Omega Centauri and surrounds, it is beautiful. The colour in particular is excellent.
(One of my pet peeves is the magically bright blue 10 billion year old Omega that so many people trot out because it looks pretty even though its physically impossible. You've nailed the colour).
The wide field is lovely. I take it that the IFN or dust or whatever that we can see is real? One would expect there to be some, given the direction of the image, but I've not seen it brought out before.
If one misses the point of the image and zooms in, one can start to see a lot of artifact, but if viewed from a meaningful distance, it's lovely. One of the very best top rank widefield omegas in the galaxy!
Thanks David. I was wondering if you were able to capture the dusty parts imaging at F/2 with your new wide field imaging rig?
Quote:
Originally Posted by JA
I love the gold and blue and of course the overall vista & detail. Excellent Col
Best
JA
Thanks JA, I was hoping I didn't overdo the saturation for the gold
Quote:
Originally Posted by Placidus
Wow! Lovely!
As a widefield study of Omega Centauri and surrounds, it is beautiful. The colour in particular is excellent.
(One of my pet peeves is the magically bright blue 10 billion year old Omega that so many people trot out because it looks pretty even though its physically impossible. You've nailed the colour).
The wide field is lovely. I take it that the IFN or dust or whatever that we can see is real? One would expect there to be some, given the direction of the image, but I've not seen it brought out before.
If one misses the point of the image and zooms in, one can start to see a lot of artifact, but if viewed from a meaningful distance, it's lovely. One of the very best top rank widefield omegas in the galaxy!
Very best,
Mike
There are a lot of images of "white" globular clusters out there on the interwebs. It is a lot easier to white balance on a really wide field than it is on the globular itself. The PhotometricColourCalibration script in PI does a good job at getting the colours correct... Sometimes. I find it works well on star clusters but messes up nebulosity areas when using my unmodded DSLR.
The dust is real but you are right, it isn't imaged often. I've only seen one other image that has had it and that was Steve a few years back I believe, he got an APOD for it
You are right about the image break down, just one of those things you get when using a DSLR at 1.5"/pixel and trying to image higher resolution regions. Tried to drizzle integrate and run 10 passes of deconvolution BUT I am finding that deconvolving OSC images gives a very different PSF to that of a mono camera.
This is a wide field imaging setup however so I'm not expecting to even come close to the excellent resolution that you achieved on Omega Centauri.
Thanks David. I was wondering if you were able to capture the dusty parts imaging at F/2 with your new wide field imaging?
I only gave it a short time last night as I want to get a few targets but I will give it another go yours seems to be a little bigger than mine and I would have to reorientate to get that area
Great job Colin - stars look terrific both in colour & seperation - well done!
Thanks Andy
The stars do break down a bit at higher resolution but that could be fixed with using the QHY163M
Quote:
Originally Posted by h0ughy
I only gave it a short time last night as I want to get a few targets but I will give it another go yours seems to be a little bigger than mine and I would have to reorientate to get that area
Our images have a very similar orientation but they're flipped along the horizontal axis. The bright star on the right of your image (at 3 O'clock) is the same bright star on the right of mine (at 2 O'clock) and that is where the dust should be.
I'd managed to show the dust with 20 minutes at F/5.2 so I'd imagine that your one hour at F/2 should bring it up.
One problem that MY EYES see though is the Bayer Matrix "tartan" pattern - it really stands out on my monitor and with my eyes. Maybe I am the only one, but I really can see the pattern a little too easily.
One problem that MY EYES see though is the Bayer Matrix "tartan" pattern - it really stands out on my monitor and with my eyes. Maybe I am the only one, but I really can see the pattern a little too easily.
You are correct Lewis, it is there I am using the CFA Drizzle Integration in PI and it is leaving me with that. I am thinking it may be the debayer method (VNG or something like that) but there is a fair amount of dithering between each and every frame. Maybe I just need to turn off the CFA drizzle part and use it as an ordinary drizzle.
I did attempt to smooth that out with noise reduction but it is still visible. FAR more so in the core image I posted above as that has no extra editing.
Our images have a very similar orientation but they're flipped along the horizontal axis. The bright star on the right of your image (at 3 O'clock) is the same bright star on the right of mine (at 2 O'clock) and that is where the dust should be.
I'd managed to show the dust with 20 minutes at F/5.2 so I'd imagine that your one hour at F/2 should bring it up.
ok here is a very pushed image
to be fair it is through a light pollution filter and my skies are very light polluted with sporting fields and industry, street lights and cars
I am using the CFA Drizzle Integration in PI and it is leaving me with that. I am thinking it may be the debayer method (VNG or something like that) but there is a fair amount of dithering between each and every frame. Maybe I just need to turn off the CFA drizzle part and use it as an ordinary drizzle.
