Ghost of Jupiter (NGC 3242)

[lazjen]

During my cloud dodging last night, I slewed to this area. I couldn't get a guide star easily (even with 2.5 sec exposures), so this is based on ISO3200 images, 5 sec duration x 13.

No darks or flats, applied. And it's massively cropped, so I guess I need a bigger scope. :)

159763

[traveller]

Good job Chris,
hope you have another go once the clouds move away.
Bo

[lazjen]

I'm sure I will one day. I'd like to get better results.

[Shiraz]

that's an excellent image - you certainly don't need a bigger scope.

[RickS]

Nice image, Chris.

[lazjen]

Well, yes, technically it's true I don't *need* a bigger scope, but this was basically a tiny spec on the camera's frame. It would be great to see it in more detail. ;)

[LightningNZ]

Great work! I'd love to go after planetary nebs but to do them justice (and give yourself a chance!) you really do need at least 2m of focal length for most of them.

[jenchris]

quite similar to what Eskimo looks like except with a different centre.
Got this a couple of nights ago

[lazjen]

I just looked for the Eskimo Nebula in Stellarium - it lists it as about 42" in size. Then I looked at the Ghost of Jupiter for comparison and I think the data Stellarium lists is wrong as it lists it at 20'48".

No matter, I do like these discussions - I often end up finding out all sorts of other interesting things! :)

[Bassnut]

Excellent Chris !. You can post larger pics of PN by cheating a bit. Upscale by say 4 or even 8 in PS and then sharpen. Sharpen does wonders on lots of data, even if its upscaled.

[lazjen]

Interesting, re: upscaling, as I hadn't considered that. I just had a play around with it - I think I can see the possibilities, but I my data didn't show much more.

I think my original shot had some sharpening - it's something I've found useful as a near final step in a number of the images I process.