This is an image of the galaxies NGC3347 and NGC3358. Two galaxies of completely different morphologies and each quite interesting to look at. I find it hard to determine which I like the most. However, I think NGC3347 holds the most interest. Mainly because it seems to have some interaction with the smaller galaxy (NGC3358) which shows a stream of blue stars appearing to be connected to each other. If you look around the field there are a myriad of fainter smaller galaxies to be seen too.
The image contains around 23 hours of data which 3 hours in each colour. It probably should have double of that to get those fainter interactions showing up brightly.
This is an image of the galaxies NGC3347 and NGC3358. Two galaxies of completely different morphologies and each quite interesting to look at. I find it hard to determine which I like the most. However, I think NGC3347 holds the most interest. Mainly because it seems to have some interaction with the smaller galaxy (NGC3358) which shows a stream of blue stars appearing to be connected to each other. If you look around the field there are a myriad of fainter smaller galaxies to be seen too.
The image contains around 23 hours of data which 3 hours in each colour. It probably should have double of that to get those fainter interactions showing up brightly.
Great little group of galaxies, nicely framed and well processed Paul, that faint bridge reminds me of the faint bridge in Burbidges Chain near NGC 247
Very nice Paul! Don't think I've seen these before.
You said "The image contains around 23 hours of data which 3 hours in each colour. It probably should have double of that to get those fainter interactions showing up brightly."
Did you mean double the amount of colour to bring out faint colour on the galaxies, or double the total amount of data?
Great little group of galaxies, nicely framed and well processed Paul, that faint bridge reminds me of the faint bridge in Burbidges Chain near NGC 247
Mike
Thanks Mike, yes that one is quite faint, I found it hard to see, but it is there. This one might come from out more with further integration but I have decided that this will be fine for now.
Quote:
Originally Posted by astroron
Link to larger image doesn't work for me Paul?
Yes it didn't for me either Ron. It is fixed now though. Sorry about that.
Quote:
Originally Posted by codemonkey
Very nice Paul! Don't think I've seen these before.
You said "The image contains around 23 hours of data which 3 hours in each colour. It probably should have double of that to get those fainter interactions showing up brightly."
Did you mean double the amount of colour to bring out faint colour on the galaxies, or double the total amount of data?
Thanks Lee, yes I meant the later. I think a deeper integration with my system (11002 sensor is quite an old tech now) overall would be better. I could see the bridge of stars in the blue channel and in the luminance, so I think doubling the colour and the luminance overall would produce a brighter look to the interaction stream of stars.
Nice work Paul. I particularly like the colours....and given the consistently high standard of your images, your site must be on is way to 6 million hits by now eh?
Nice work Paul. I particularly like the colours....and given the consistently high standard of your images, your site must be on is way to 6 million hits by now eh?
Thanks Peter. I don't know how many people have come through my website other than those on the little spinning world. It only registers a distinct hit once from that user. I only instituted that a few years back. I suppose it is probably around one hundred thousand distinct hits since I have had the website, I don't know.
If you're referring to Mike's 3 millionth visitor, I think that is entirely likely. He has had his site up for quite a few years longer than me, his work is appreciated by many and his images might be counted by the view. Good on his images for reaching that many people, it's only good for astronomy. A dispute over page views is not something I want to get into really.
If you're referring to Mike's 3 millionth visitor, I think that is entirely likely. He has had his site up for quite a few years longer than me, his work is appreciated by many and his images might be counted by the view. Good on his images for reaching that many people, it's only good for astronomy. A dispute over page views is not something I want to get into really.
Anyway thanks for your comment on my image.
Mike who?
I have noticed your recent images have a smoother/more colourful look to them. Different processing? Anyway a nice change-up ..
Last edited by Peter Ward; 06-04-2019 at 10:20 AM.
