The Box Nebula and other faint PN's in Sagittarius

[strongmanmike]

The Box Nebula (NGC 6445) is a fabulous little..?.."Gem" I guess :) in Sagittarius and made even more interesting by the fact that the small globular cluster NGC 6440 is in close proximity and makes for a lovely pairing.

Like most planetary nebulae the Little Gem looks best in narrowband so in order to show both the globular (which is reddened strongly by intervening dust) and the star field, plus the the Little Gem, all at their best, I have used a blend of narrowband data and RGB.

As a bonus and to my surprise, I found two other very small and faint planetary nebulae in the field, I couldn't find their designations so if anyone can help out with this, that'd be great :)

Both nights used were clear but with a significant Moon and cut short by heavy fog...always something :rolleyes: The RGB was captured after Moon set.

The Box Nebula and two others (http://www.pbase.com/strongmanmike2002/image/160572742/original) (close up)

Full Field (http://www.pbase.com/strongmanmike2002/image/160572740/original) (slightly cropped for composition)

This was a full test (using Ha OIII & SII) of the new Astronomik 6nm filters and under Moonlight = very happy.

Mike

[multiweb]

That's a very cool Neb. :thumbsup: Where's that cluster in Sagittarius? (for reference, if I don't get side tracked on M8, again...)

[RickS]

Nice one, Mike! I haven't seen that object before.

Cheers,
Rick.

[strongmanmike]

Hmmm? lemmi see :question:...ummm, open planetarium star chart program, open search facility, type in "NGC 6440", click go..wait a fraction of a second..and bingo! there you have a star chart on your screen that shows you exactly where it is :eyepop: :cool: :lol:

If you don't have a planetarium star chart software..:question:...umm? it's not that far from the Lagoon Nebula :shrug: :rofl:

Mike

[Slawomir]

Glad to hear that you are happy with your new Astronomis Michael, and why wouldn't you be happy? It is a very nice image and a pleasant break from "in your face" vivid and contrasty images of bright nebulae :)

Those faint planetary nebulae can be easily missed - I still could not locate the fainter of the two!

Muchos Nachos

[multiweb]

Ha! Went to see the pic directly. I don't read your posts :P

[LewisM]

It's a common problem caused by the over-whelming magenta of most of his images. Temporary blindness :P :P :P

Forgive the indiscretion, but it all seems rather blue cast to me Mike. That was the impression I took away (despite the lovely resolution on the main target)

[strongmanmike]

Yeah, it's not imaged that much really but it's pretty I reckon :)



Thanks Slaw, although they are like magnets for good reason...can't just stick to the top 20 huh? :)



Fair enough :question: :rolleyes:



Ooooh look, I post a blue biased image and you make another magenta joke :screwy: man, gotta work on your material Lewis :lol:

Oh and before you jump in, yes...I looked very hard but couldn't find a jet for you anywhere :sadeyes:

Mike :thumbsup:

[SkyViking]

Some great images and targets Mike, the planetary is beautifully resolved and colours are very nice. I really like the composition with the globular too, very striking! :thumbsup:

[strongmanmike]

Thanks for the well meaning feedback Rolf :thumbsup:.... now, enough already...what are you going to post??? the suspense is killing me :scared: it must be over 200hrs by now :lol:

Ok I am now guessing the Hubble deep field...:question:

Mike

[SkyViking]

LOL, it's not deliberate - I've just been too busy with other things lately to make any serious dent in the various piles of data that need processing...
But I can confirm that data gathering for Project X has officially ceased, and processing started :)

[LewisM]

He he...wellllllllllll you do ask for it with your constant ramblin' about magenta this and magenta that :P

I gots no new material. My brain is faddled.

[strongmanmike]

.....Says the King of rambling ;) :lol:

[LewisM]

Phew, I thought you were going to say QUEEN.

[strongmanmike]

:lol: and I'd be perfectly ok with that too :thumbsup:

[LewisM]

You're a little gem Mike :P

[topheart]

Another nice planetary to image!!

Thanks,
Mike!!

[cometcatcher]

That's a ripper Mike! I love the composition of the glob next to it. Never seen it before. How did you come across it?

I want this now too, even if my pic does suck. I'll be paying your finderscope a visit next clear moonless night. :P

[Geoff45]

Nice combo Mike. I didn't know about the little gem, so that's another one to go on the list. Problem is that the list keeps getting longer. Really colourful greens and blues in that gem.
Geoff

[Stevec35]

Hmm - not 100% convinced about the colour Mike. Seems a bit too blue to me but what would I know. Colour aside it's a great shot of two objects that should be imaged more often.

Cheers

Steve

[Stevec35]

Actually something I forgot too. The little gem nebula is actually NGC 6818. I've seen NGC 6445 referred to as "The crawling monster planetary" but never the little gem. Of course don't let my extreme pedantry detract from what is definitely a nice image.

Cheers

Steve

[tilbrook@rbe.ne]

Marvellous work Mike!:)

Remarkable detail on a 57 arc sec planetary.:thumbsup:

Cheers,

Justin.

[Geoff45]

Good work Steve. Keep him on the straight and narrow. Spurious info not allowed here. Still, as I said above it's a great image.
BTW I've seen 6445 referred to as the "box nebula"

[astronobob]

Mighty grouse resolution Mike, setting a benchmark in time of astro-imaging me thinks :thumbsup: wonder what these PN's and others will look like in 10-20yrs, who knows, :question:
Great show and interesting presentation Mike :thumbsup::thumbsup:

[strongmanmike]

Well thank you one and all I appreciate the feedback and nice comments :thumbsup:

Regarding the colloquial name of NGC 6445, it seems there is some confusion out there, not only is it referred to as The Little Gem in my Planetarium software Star AtlasPRO, I had also found several other references to NGC 6445 as being The Little Gem and here are two:

http://server7.wikisky.org/starview?object_type=3&object_id=294&object_name=NGC+6445&locale=EN

and

http://rao.150m.com/NGC6445.html

However... digging a bit deeper

THIS (https://books.google.com.au/books?id=a6VY0Q1zsJoC&pg=PA489&lpg=PA489&dq=Little+Gem+Nebula+NGC+6445&source=bl&ots=9Q5kY8YETe&sig=jWPGP_RZ9BkfSflNXcapDvMlcmY&hl=en&sa=X&ei=D0GRVfWFEY3V8gWcqJhA&ved=0CDYQ6AEwBA#v=onepage&q=Little%20Gem%20Nebula%20NGC%20644 5&f=false) may be the reason for the confusion (first paragraph), seems there was an error some time ago in the Sky Atlas 2000 Vol 2..? :)

The Little Gem seems in fact more likely to be NGC 6818 (also in Sagittarius). Seems NGC 6445 is more often referred to as The Box Nebula in most cases.

Have to admit though, it is a little gem of an object though :P

Anyway...great news!

I had conformation of the nature of the other two faint PN's I found in my image...one of which I was only 13yrs too late to claim the discovery :D

This from sky object guru Sakib Rasool:

"The one on the top is called PN G007.9+03.8 and was only discovered in 2002. It is one of nearly 1200 MASH planetary nebulae, see the Ha image here: http://cdsarc.u-strasbg.fr/viz-bin/vizExec/.show?5127&G007.9%2B03.8

The second is also from the MASH survey, this is PN G007.7+03.9, see here: http://cdsarc.u-strasbg.fr/viz-bin/vizExec/.show?5127&G007.7%2B03.9

Also I think the halo around NGC 6445 might have been discovered in 1986 or 1987."

Thanks again guys and nice to know at least some people read image posts more carefully than Marc :whistle: :thumbsup:...will make the necessary name changes.

Mike

[cometcatcher]

Just to confuse things further, Stellarium refers to NGC6445 as "Little Gem" and NGC6818 as "Little Gem Nebula". They iz confuzzled also.

[strongmanmike]

I think the Sky Atlas 2000 mistake theory may be the culprit :)

Bit like the "where is the running chicken?" dilemma :question:...naaaaah, we all know where that is :D

Mike

[Rex]

Beautiful shot Mike, and regardless of the real"name", it really is a little gem. Great resolution, colour and image scale. Maybe one day when the clouds decide to part for more than 10 minutes I might actually get some imaging done??????

[strongmanmike]

Cheers Rex, My re naming it The Box Nebula has even been questioned now...so I give up (bloody internet :bashcomp:) Meah, what's in a name?...heck, it looks like a Butterfly to me anyway :shrug: :thumbsup:

I send you good vibes for the clouds to part for a whole night, on a Friday with no commitments the next day, amen! :prey:

Mike

[Geoff45]

Yeah, I've seen IC4406 called the Box Nebula.
BTW how did you spot the fainter of the two planetaries in that huge field?

[Placidus]

Hi, Mike,

Very nicely done. Good detail in the main planetary. Even with your two close-ups to work from, finding the two tiny ones kept me pleasantly occupied while the casserole cooked. You must have sharp eyes.

Best,
MBJ

[strongmanmike]

It was very obvious, remember it is my eyes seeing the sub frames, the pre-processing, the combining, the layering etc etc although having said that, I didn't notice it until I did the initial RGB combine in Astroart and bang, there it was, a little green donnut :thumbsup:



They are both in the wide field only but great to hear that other people like to scan and have a good look at images before passing comment too. Sometimes I can go from an initial "wha tha Fu??" to hmmm?...and finally, nah, I actually like that...yeah nice! :thumbsup: So always good to have a good look I recon, I usually look pretty well around your images too, now THEY are worth surfing :thumbsup:

Crazy thing this colour processing sometimes...especially when using NB data.

Mike

[nandopg]

Hi Mike,
The full field is an absolute fantastic image, with the PN and the globular cluster in the same FOV forming an outstanding composition.
Other nice thing is that this PN is not very well known what increases even more the impact of the image.
My only point is that the image looks to me a bit over saturated. However I also noted that nobady shares this point of view with me as most of the astronomical images I have seen, are always a bit over saturated for my taste. So, this should be just me.

Congratulations for the great result,

Fernando

[strongmanmike]

Thank you for this assessment Fernando I am very glad you liked it.

You are quite right about the degree of saturation, it is a pretty personal thing, especially with narrow band imaging and I get that some people are not fans of the saturation level that I often settle on...but I have been doing this imaging game for many, many, years now and I think it is important that I image for me first, too old to change now :lol:. Astroimaging has become so much like visual art in recent years, particularly with the popularity of narrowband filters. Most importantly it is my art and I do it for me and not to simply please others but if others like it then I am very happy about that, however if they don't that's fine too, it is like any other art, not every piece is liked by everyone but everyone should remain happy :jump2: and comfortable in their own imaging skin :thumbsup:

:question:..err?..hope that didn't sound like a soliloquy :question: :lol: just being honest :)

Mike

Mike

[nandopg]

Hi Mike,
Your reply don't sound like a soliloquy. It points out precisely what our hobby is, something primarily personal, if the audience also likes is a bonus.
I can say that with your words you have increased my respect and admiration for your work, once now I understand it.

Putting all of this together, plus more time admiring your image, I can say:
Congratulations for this mix of technology, technique and art.

Fernando

[Harel_Boren]

... And color is absolutely fabulous!

Cheers,
Harel

[strongmanmike]

Good on you Fernando and cheers :thumbsup:



Thanks a lot Harel, fun game we participate in huh? :thumbsup:

Mike

[Shiraz]

Marvellous image Mike - composition is great and the impact of the combination of two quite different objects is impressive. Surely it is quite special to have 3 PNs in a field - these are such rare things?

[strongmanmike]

Thanks a lot Ray, I agree, I think the fact that there are three planetary nebulae in the field and the unique pairing of objects is perhaps juuust a tad more interesting than the slight blue colour cast :rolleyes: :lol: and why I decided to shoot'em in the first place :thumbsup:

Mike

[jase]

Onya Mikey! 'bout time you ventured off the beaten path. Lovely object pairing with an aesthetic appeal. No idea about the neb names, most DSOs have so many designations already, never hurts to add a few more to confuse the hell out of everyone.

[strongmanmike]

Funnily enough I did think of you when imaging this pair, thinking "Jase better appreciate this...and should get him off my back for a couple of images time :prey: "

:P

Mike

[peter_4059]

Beautiful image Mike. The PN sure is interesting.

[strongmanmike]

Thanks a lot Peter, it's a bit of a messy one though...no real symmetry, huh? :question:

Mike

[Bassnut]

ha, thats great!, love the blue bias, makes it pop.

[strongmanmike]

I thought so too Fred :thumbsup: Processing the two data sets to have the glob and the star field appear RGB while the PN remained in the more dynamic narrowband palette was indeed a challenge and it was not a simple cut and paste. I probably should have collected a bit more RGB and perhaps some Lum too but meah, she'll do, the point I wanted to make was made :)
Mike

[AstroJason]

That full frame image is incredible Mike. I have never seen this object before such a cool looking PN with all its twists and knots. I really like the blue green colour with the pink core and its balanced out against that glob near by on the other side of the frame. Great framing mate. Jase

[strongmanmike]

Cheers Jason, something a bit different huh? :)

Mike

[marc4darkskies]

Who cares what it's called! Very cool Mike! :thumbsup: Like the colour and detail and the other tiny PNs! Full frame is similarly cool! Off-the-beaten-track quotient is high! :)

[strongmanmike]

Cheers Marcus and good luck in Parks (you have it in the bag! :D)

Mike

[marc4darkskies]

Hehe ... always the jinxster!! :lol:

[strongmanmike]

By law of averages...I have to get it right eventually :D

Are we there yet?...are we there yet?...are we there yet?...are we.... you get the idea :P

Mike

[marco]

Another excellent results Mike! I have to say that at the beginning I was not sure about the color combination RGB on the field + only narrow band on the object, but I have to say that this image has grown on me and I do really like now the "fresh" perspective it gives on the area.
I didn't know this object and have to say it is extremely interesting..
Lovely image indeed..
Cheers
Marco

[strongmanmike]

Well, Marco I am not surprised...given time and exposure taste buds can change. When I met my wife nearly 30 years ago, she used to loath Parmesan cheese, hated it...well, after spending some time with a person of Italian heritage who loved pasta, that loathing turned to "hmmm I'll give it a go..." and then soon changed completely so that within the first year of knowing each other she was putting Parmesan cheese on her pasta (and Zuppa) with a bloody shovel! :eyepop:....and still does to this day :lol:

Mike :D