M20 LHaRGB

[Paul Haese]

I have managed to pick up quite a few hours of RGB data with a few clear nights recently despite the forecasts.

This image is 11 hours of integration time, most of which is from the Ha data. I think I probably need a bit more RGB and L data to fill the image out to my liking but I am running out of time now. There is only about 4 hours of imaging time a night (down to 40 degrees altitude), some of that is being taken up by focusing or waiting for the meridian flip. So I doubt I will get much more data this year on the object. Though I will try to capture more if the chances arise.

I can't really decide which of the two images I have produced I like more. The detailing is the same for both but the colouring is different and that is what will attract people to one over the other.

Click here (http://paulhaese.net/M20.html) for larger resolution image.

[gregbradley]

I like this version. Classic beautiful crimson colours.

Greg.

[Atmos]

I am just in love with how 3D it appears :-)

[RickS]

Classic colours do it for me too, Paul!

[Octane]

This is sublime, mate. Stunning.

H

[Placidus]

Hi, Paul,

I can see it's a superb rendition, and well done, but I far prefer the more Hubble-Palette look.

Thrilled that you did both.
Best,
Mike

[Stevec35]

Looks great to me Paul. I just can't take my eyes off those stunning dust lanes.

Cheers

Steve

[Peter Ward]

Nicely done. I do like the colours in this version. :thumbsup:

[Somnium]

it is hard to choose between them, i like the natural colour and intensity of this one, but your NB image has such depth that looks fantastic. i guess it depends on your mood for the day ...

[Somnium]

i also noticed that this image has picked up quite a bit more dust than the other one, is that just down to how you processed it or due to the RGB data ?

[Paul Haese]

Thanks Peter, for your comment.



Thanks Greg. I thought people might prefer this over the NB version. It is a traditional object after all.



Just contrasting masks in the processing, but thanks all the same Colin.



I thought you might like that. Thanks Rick.



Thanks H, that is sort of what I was aiming for. Happy you think it is so good.



Thanks Mike. I like the multitude of colours myself and it is my preference. You know I had to do both versions. :thumbsup:



Thanks Steve, Those lanes have been a complete revelation right from the start of this target. When I looked at the luminance data several months ago I was immediately impressed by the detail in the lanes. I did have to be careful about how much I sharpened them though. Too much and it would have looked over done. I think I got the balance right in the end.



Thanks Aidan and I understand. It's good that some think one version is better than the other and reinforces in my mind that there are many ways to see things in imaging.




The RGB data does did brighten up the data a bit, but I think I might have stretched this one just a little bit more than the NB version.

[Regulus]

That deep, rich, black background really makes the nebula stand right out. Colours are classic and it looks great.
There's some nice detail in the larger image that got my attention.

A good result Paul.

Trev

[Leonardo70]

Great image Paul.

All the best,
Leo

[John K]

Hi Paul,

I think both images have something to offer.

Have you thought about actually combining both images and then going for the midway point between the two?

I know that this is not a purist approach to imaging but perhaps an alternative.

John K.

[SimmoW]

Holy resolution Batman! so 3D, love it Paul

[Paul Haese]

Thanks Trevor and Leo for your comments.

Trevor I used the same star layering for both images, so I am not sure why it would appear there is a loss of star colour in one. Maybe the saturation is not quite the same. :shrug:



Thanks John. I did try a combination of both and the colouring was more muted and did not look right. I lost a fair bit of the 3D look too.



Thanks Simon. The 3D look can be achieved by using selective contrast masking on different parts of the object. I find it is an effective means of showing some depth to an object.

[Regulus]

Paul, your right. i just checked and your right.
I put it down to fine tuning a new monitor during the course of the evening.

Trev

[marco]

Definitely my preference goes to this one :) Excellent rendition Paul!
Clear skies
Marco

[topheart]

That's a top notch Trifid indeed!
I don't think I have seen anything better for a long time.

Masterful!!

Thanks,
Tim

[Paul Haese]

Thanks Marco, I could have bet this would be your preference. Happy to know you like it.



Thanks Tim. Nice of you to say so. :)

[PRejto]

I was admiring the rich colour and incredible sharpness when I rather suddenly though this might be the last thing one would see when attacked by a giant moray eel. It's even got the two eyes if you rotate the photo 90 degrees CCW. Must be the detail and sharpness making me hallucinate.

Great photo!!

Peter

[alpal]

Hi Paul,
you've really got that GSO RC12 performing so well.
That's one of the best M20's that I've seen on here -
it's sharp & also nicely processed..

cheers
Allan

[Paul Haese]

Thanks Peter. Now that you mention it I can sort of see the resemblance.



Thanks Allan. I still think the collimation could do with a tiny tweak myself but the results are productive and very pleasing of late. There is a slight problem with a piece of code in the driver of the AOX in Maxim DL that affects the first sub after a move such as meridian flip or focus run. Once that is sorted (out of my control but I need to keep reminding people) I think it will run like clock work.

[SkyViking]

A superb M20 indeed Paul. Gorgeous colours and very fine detail throughout.
The central dust lanes are very crisp and impressive.
The cute dark cloud on the right edge is a nice bonus - if I was to make any suggestion it would be to have shifted the composition slightly in order to include both the Trifid and all of the little dark cloud.
Top work Paul, thanks for the view.

[Shiraz]

yep, for this colour scheme :thumbsup:

that is a very nice image in all respects.

[Paul Haese]

Thanks Rolf. I did consider that cloud and tried several different compositions. Without a flattener at present I am limited to certain compositions.



Thanks Ray. I am still torn between the two colour schemes.

[Bassnut]

Saturated colour, excellent star colour, much detail, top 3d effect, altogether a smick effort Paul, well done.

[GC - South Aus]

G'day Paul

I really like this one Paul!

All your work I have seen has always been great.

Keep them coming :thumbsup:

Regards

Gav

[Paul Haese]

Thanks Fred and Gav for your comments. It is such an interesting object, I am glad I went and imaged it again this year. The FSQ image was good but lacked the detail that I could obtain. Next year I will hammer out the Eagle with similar renditions.

[LewisM]

Superb rendition.

And there are still people out there who ignore your advice re collimating the GSO RC 's, despite the proof in the pudding...

It would also be of purely academic interest to compare this image with one captured with a far more expensive RC.

[Paul Haese]

Thanks Lewis,

it does seem that you can lead a horse to water but you cannot make it drink.

It has taken a few years to tweak this scope and I often think about a nah sayer suggesting these scopes were defective and little if any images had been produced from them. If this is defective, I'll take a few more. :thumbsup: Sometimes one has to wait patiently to see results. Astronomy I find teaches lots of patience. Though I often find I am in short supply of it. :)

[gregbradley]

I agree. These scopes are really showing that the basic thing - the optics, are very good. The truss structure also appears to be well done. The mirror support seems to be improved, the collimation accessories and the focuser needs to be replaced.

I am continually surprised at the quality of your images from it. Not to take anything from the scope but I think your site is pretty exceptional and it plays a major part in the sharp images as well. I see a huge difference in the CDK's performance between mediocre seeing and good seeing.

Greg.

[Paul Haese]

I think there are a number of factors that are contributing. I am not sure putting it down to any one or two things is the answer.

Getting the scope imaging as a system has involved a lot of tweaking and frustrations. Things like collimation, polar alignment, guiding, PEC implementation, Protrack, use of the AOX and remote imaging allow the collection of good data. The local seeing conditions are contributing but without all the other things under control the seeing would not have as significant an impact. In any case one should try to eliminate all the issues so that only seeing remains the limiting factor.

Of critical importance is the guiding. An AOX cannot work properly until the traditional guiding is nailed down. I also had to tweak the bump settings quite a bit too. So the AOX should not be seen as a panacea. Though its use in good seeing makes a huge difference.

Fine tuning is the name of the game here. Subtle adjustments to refine the tune of the system. There needs to be a fair bit of obsessiveness with trying to work out each element and tune out errors.

In any event I am enjoying the rewards now, but there have been times when I felt like ditching every thing in the Murray River.