Galaxy in the deep south - now with Hubble comparison :-P

[strongmanmike]

This is a rarely imaged galaxy in far southern Octans. A leisurely scan of my planetarium program indicated this might be a good candidate to shoot. It sits in a very faint bed of Galactic Cirrus dust too.

The Cirrus dust is pretty faint and the proximity to the pole (just 50deg elevation at the meridian) put it in a somewhat unfavourable position from my dark sky site in that it spent much of its arc across the sky in the upper portion of the glow of Canberra :rolleyes:.

Never the less.... I thought I'd have a crack... but, like Rolf does, I had to push the processing just slightly in order to reveal the faint galactic cirrus but at at the expense of a slight increase in noise, which doesn't bother me too much, rather see the faint stuff than not :)

Along with the usual out in the elements pleasurable outdoor experience complete with beer, coffee and Friday night football and late night ABC discussions and quizzes on the radio (and lonely posts on IIS about mundane things) etc. each night..and apart from one night being plagued by some annoying wafting thin cloud at times (the type you can still image through but you know it ain't good), delivered good to excellent seeing with guide errors rarely greater than 0.1 pix (0.3 arcsec) and regularly well below, in fact for a period of a few hours one night the guide star essentially didn't move...serious astro orgasm material! :P :jump:

Anyway....referred to as a double barred spiral galaxy and at over 100 Million light years distant, this ain't a close galaxy and listed in LEDA at a modest 4.2' X 2.7' in size, it also isn't particularly large in angular size, so, the good seeing conditions proved a real blessing in revealing some of the tiny subtle features in the ring of the galaxy (didn't actually discard a single sub frame!). In fact, after finishing my processing, a quick peruse of the very few available images on the web revealed no image with greater resolution, so I was quite happy with the outcome. The small, spiral galaxy near the bottom right of the full frame image is ESO 048 - G 007

At 18hrs of total exposure, this is now officially the longest exposure I have done with the F3.8 AG12 :) would seem I just can't quite wait long enough to crack the elusive 20hr mark :doh: (although had the fog not descended on Mon morning I would'a! :doh:)

Close Up (http://www.pbase.com/strongmanmike2002/image/164023737/original)

Full Frame (http://www.pbase.com/strongmanmike2002/image/163986863/original)

Hubble Comparison (http://www.pbase.com/strongmanmike2002/image/164041146/original)

Hope you enjoy the view :)

Mike

[Bart]

Very, very nice. Never seen before. Beautifly presented, framed, wonderful galaxy detail.....wait, am I being a groupie??:shrug:

Naah...top stuff Mike! :D

[glend]

Wonderful Mike. And i can count at least five other small galaxies in that image in addition to the ones you mentioned. How long were your subs? IOTD for sure.

[RobF]

Very very nice Mike. You've certainly got galaxy processing down pat!

[strongmanmike]

Thanks Barto, glad you liked the view, something different :)

Groupie..:question:.. is that what dirty old men do to nurses :question:...ah no wait, that's groping huh..?..oi, don't touch me fella :scared: :lol:



Thanks Glen, I used 15min subs for Lum and 5min subs for colour all bin 1X1...but I think there might be more than 5 other galaxies in the full frame shot :D



Cheers Rob, glad you think so...still wish I had a 32" at 2200m in the Andes...:)

Mike

[gregbradley]

That's a beautiful image Mike and I think one of your best.
You are right this one is rarely imaged. I think this is the first time I have seen it.
A stunner.
Greg.

[Somnium]

what an absolutely stunning image! well done

[Placidus]

Beautiful, gentle processing, Mike. The detail in the main galaxy is glorious.

Yes, I counted at least 57 absolutely definite galaxies in the image.

[Atmos]

Very nice Mike! What I do love is being able to see the variation in the dusty background. The main galaxy is very smoooooooth :P

[strongmanmike]

Hey thanks Greg, you recon..? Well, glad you liked it :thumbsup:



Thanks Aidan, nice to hear :)



Cheers Mike and Trish...I think 57 is probably more like it :lol:



Errrr..? you mean, dusty "foreground" :whistle:...in relation to the galaxy that is :question: :lol: Thanks Mate, I've been reasonably lucky with the seeing this year out at Walla's actually..touch wood :prey:

Mike

[atalas]

Yep, she's a beauty big guy:thumbsup:seeing must of been good looking at that fine edge detail alright.

[SimmoW]

Gorgeous Mike! Such a symmetrical little Galaxy. Great to see the rare objects captured. Even more precious when it takes 18 hours..

[Retrograde]

So many tiny galaxies with a marvellous centrepiece.
Just superb Mike!

[RickS]

That's a stunner, Mike. A rare object captured and processed beautifully. Getting perilously close to megadata though :lol:



There's a very nice one by Don Goldman.

Cheers,
Rick.

[strongmanmike]

Cheers giant Louie :thumbsup:...yeah the seeing has been reasonably kind around here in recent months :prey:



Thanks Simon, only one other decent amateur image that I could find, by Don Goldman with his 20" CDK at Coona but while he has certainly gone heavier than I on the sharpening... I don't think it actually shows any more real detail and our Stella limiting magnitudes appear about the same even, so yes, I got good seeing ;)



Thanks so much Pete, very glad you enjoyed the view..the tiny galaxies always make a galaxy image I recon :thumbsup:

Pete

[strongmanmike]

Ha ha yeah I know, imagine, Mike aaaalmost hitting 20hrs :eyepop:

Yes Dons image is the only other decent shot out there that I could find and it is excellent but even with a 20" CDK at Coona, a close comparison reveals little or no difference in resolution and limiting magnitude :shrug: Don has just gone much harder on the sharpening and I'm not sure what is real detail in the galaxy ring and what is sharpening artefacts? I am also puzzled with his cirrus dust distribution, it doesn't match mine that closely really...perhaps a flats issue..? His image shows a blue halo/glow around the galaxy too that I'm not sure is real? Still a great shot, just musing.

Mike

[RickS]

You have the benefit of hours staring at the data, Mike, and that counts for a lot. I did notice the halo.

Cheers,
Rick.

[billdan]

Congratulations Mike on achieving 18 hours exposure time on the AG12. The Galaxy looks gorgeous, lots of detail and colour. Was it difficult guiding so close to the pole?

Cheers
Bill

[strongmanmike]

Yes, complete with my decon glasses :P

[strongmanmike]

Cheers Bill :thumbsup:

Well 18hours is not exactly in the transfixed imaging league but with 12" of aperture at F3.8 its the equivalent of a much longer exposure with smaller and/or slower instruments.

Actually guiding at the pole should be a little better and it sure was, so combined with the good seeing experienced the guide star plot was insanely still much of the time.

Mike

[RickS]

I see... worms :eyepop:

[strongmanmike]

No worms in my images fella!...just imagine the barrage of abuse I'd get :eyepop: :lol:

Mike

[beren]

:thumbsup: clicked on the image here and thought wow great image of a unique looking galaxy then opened the full frame version and ......it's a jaw dropper . Admire your work mate :)

[Slawomir]

I really like how your image shows a contrast between dusty areas in the top part of the image and the free of dust area on the bottom. Of course, colours and detail for the entire image are both 10/10 :thumbsup:

[troypiggo]

Love these little-imaged galaxies you bring to us. Gorgeous.

[multiweb]

Nice little galaxy. You need more FL though. :thumbsup:

[strongmanmike]

Nice stuff, glad to know, makes the effort worth it when people like the outcome :)



Thanks Suavi, it's always good when an image comes together, even better when the seeing cooperates :thumbsup:



Good to know Troy...I'll try and bring a few more before the year is out



Cheers Mark but nah, FL for FL sake is an essentially foundless belief that bounds you to the drudgery of mega data because of the generally associated slooow focal ratio involved, seems almost a matra for some though :rolleyes: sigh...just no tellin some :). For genuine improved resolution it is image scale that you need and that can be supplied without an increase in focal length ;)....of course above all it is the seeing that needs to be good (and the optics), without good seeing, hey, then a 20" will not out perform a 12" at the same image scale, as far as real detail and resolution goes (not perceived resolution and detail - they are different) ...anyway that's my theory and I'm sticking to it...until I get my own LF scope one day of course, then it will become my mantra too :lol:

Mike

[alpal]

Well done Mike - a top image &
it does compare well with this one:
http://astrodonimaging.com/gallery/ngc-7098/

cheers
Allan

[strongmanmike]

Cheers Alan, I agree but I would happily swap setups with Don in a heartbeat :lol:

Mike

[marc4darkskies]

A wonderful image Mike! :thumbsup: Fantastic detail! Excellent seeing is a rare commodity these days isn't it! Not having much luck in that department around these parts :sadeyes: but I can't let that slow me down too much!

Marcus

[strongmanmike]

Cheers Marcus :) Actually out here at Wallaroo I have been pretty lucky with the seeing so far this year, hardly any nights I could really class as actually bad, lots not too bad, quite a few above average, a few quite good and a sprinkling that could be classed as excellent (hmmm?...very scientific scale that :question:)

Mike

[alpal]

Dear Mike,
there is always someone with a bigger & more expensive telescope.
As per the previous posts - it's the seeing that really counts
if everything else is tuned to perfection.

cheers
Allan

[codemonkey]

Have't seen that one before Mike, and it's a cracker. I really enjoyed the full frame.

[Spookyer]

Yes very nice this one.

[strongmanmike]

Too right, looking at various images taken by various scopes at I-telescope, I get the feeling that a night of "average" seeing at Siding Spring is probably about the same as a night of "good" seeing at Wallaroo? The sort of seeing experienced at the worlds best sites however, like La Palma, Cerro Tololo and Mauna Kea etc, well, they are in a different league all together and perhaps twice as good in general, hence the noticeably sharper images taken from these sites :)



Cheers Lee, yes it has hardly been imaged by amateurs, at least not many can be found on the net anyway...?



Cheers Brett :thumbsup:

[Stevec35]

Excellent Mike! Certainly agree that it's one of your best.

Cheers

Steve

[Phil Hart]

cracking shot Mike. nicely selected and great to get the conditions to make the whole field of the image work. background galaxy at the bottom right of centre is my fav.. so many in there.

Phil

[strongmanmike]

Yeah? fair enough, I like it too :)



Cheers Phil, been quite lucky with seeing in recent times :)

Mike

[strongmanmike]

Just added a Hubble Comparison (http://www.pbase.com/strongmanmike2002/image/164041146/original).

Seems to indicate at least two distant galaxies can be seen through the arms of NGC 7098...cool :)

Oh to have no atmosphere......

MIke

[Placidus]

Yes I can see those two. So nice to see that you got the same answer as the "answer in the back of the book", not just for the two galaxies but for many other features. :thumbsup::thumbsup:

[strongmanmike]

Yeah that's why I like doing these comparisons, many small and/or faint often non descript features we might pick up in our data can be clearly identified in Hubble data.

Mike

[Atmos]

That's why I like to compare my results against other images, good way to check whether I've got some bad flats, so long as their flats are good too :P

[multiweb]

Agreed about aperture but if you stick a barlow in there you'll still have a little more pixel to play with per second of arc. Easier to process and abuse with deconv IMHO. BTW you should jump on that old Q in the classified. You won't look back.

[strongmanmike]

Yeah probably but 0.42"/pix (2X barlow) is getting pretty over sampled but not a bad idea to try...just can't be bothered reconfiguring everything...which I think I've banged on about before too :question: lazy...:lol:

Yes saw that N Q and while tempting I don't have the dosh just yet unfortunately and the latest Q is shorter and takes the 645 reducer which is the only one that will cover my 16803 chip.

Mike

[Slawomir]

Pretty cool comparison Mike. Quite striking how stars get enlarged by the atmosphere, as opposed to crispy pinpoint stars in the Hubble image. As for overall detail, I reckon a few extra hours of exposure and you would be able to close the gap even further :thumbsup:

[gregbradley]

At least your image got the whole galaxy. Somebody had a bite out of the Hubble one!
Greg.

[Windston]

Wow! Love it! Great image Mike, the depth is unbelievable!

[astronobob]

Mighty Fine Image there, , proudly brighter at the outer ring than the hubble version aswell !
Gotta say its a unique form and more intriguing than the average galaxy, Mike, Damn fine astro-imaging :eyepop: & write-up's you do :cool2:

[strongmanmike]

Cheers Suavi, yeah there was a reason NASA spent the billions it has on Hubble :D As for more exposure?...every man has his limit ;) besides probably a case of diminishing returns and too many nights wasted for little gain when I could be imaging something else :)



Yeah I had to take the same bites out of mine in Photoshop, just so they would match :P



Thanks a lot Dan, glad you liked it :thumbsup:



Thanks Bob, yeah for a rather "simple" galaxy really, it has something special huh? The various elements, subtleties and the whole field, seem to just work for a pleasing scene :)

Mike

[Slawomir]

Giving up so easily... ;)

[strongmanmike]

Like a bank (and sex :whistle:) I lose interest when I withdraw :face:

[Shiraz]

cracking good image that. love detail and the subtle processing/colour. It is great to see something so interesting from off the beaten track