An average NGC 7424

[marc4darkskies]

Seeing is everything! Consequently, this image is mediocre because of the poor seeing in these parts lately :sadeyes:. I gathered 12 hours of luminance data over 4 nights, in seeing ranging from 2.5 to 3.6 arcsec - bad at my image scale of 0.59 arcsec. I usually reject subs worse than about 2.5 arcsec seeing.

Just for the heck of it I processed everything I had that was better than 3.1 arcsec - 10 hours worth. Various sharpening techniques were carefully and laboriously applied to mitigate some of the poor seeing effects, but the result is not convincing IMO. The average result was expected of course. Faint stars are either lost in the background or are faint fuzzy blobs. Higher signal detail and stars were smeared or bloated. Frankly, this image is beyond the limit of what sharpening can adequately address but ... when life gives you lemons ...

70% full scale (to hide some of the poor seeing untidiness):
http://www.pbase.com/gailmarc/image/164220403/original

BTW, if you want to see a really good amateur image see Mike and Trish's (Placidus) masterful version and see for yourself what a difference good sky conditions makes.

[RickS]

Doesn't look too shabby to me, Marcus.

[Slawomir]

I would be totally thrilled if I could capture this galaxy is such detail :thumbsup:

[strongmanmike]

Yeah looks pretty ok to me too Marcus :thumbsup:...bout the same as I got a couple'a years ago in average seeing. As you say seeing is everything, sometimes there isn't much you can do about it, even with clever sharpening techniques...but doesn't mean the image isn't worthwhile, so I hope you are still planning to get the RGB for it :)

Yes, M&T's image is very good.

Mike

[cometcatcher]

Oh my goodness that's only 3 arc minutes across! I would be thrilled with something half that good.

[Geoff45]

Looks good Marcus in spite of the shabby seeing lately. At Wiruna over the last weekend the best I got was 2.8" and most were over 3".
Geoff

[marc4darkskies]

Aahhh, you guys ... you're all too kind! At least the lemonade isn't too bitter then? :)



Cheers Rick!



Thanks Suavi! The optimal seeing for my rig is about 1.8 arcsecs. I actually got some of that when collecting RGB for my 6770 galaxy group and in times gone by. Consequently, knowing what the rig can do in such seeing, I'm not easily satisfied with less!



Cheers Mike! You know how it is with galaxies - there's no hiding from bad seeing and when you don't even get average seeing it's easy to be disappointed!

RGB on top of this? Lipstick on a pig maybe? :P



Thanks Kevin! It's actually a good 9 to 10 arcmins across. Long FL (with good seeing) is required to do it justice.



Cheers Geoff! Commiserations on the conditions at Wiruna. Did you make any lemonade?

[Peter Ward]

All right then, I won't give you an A+

You'll simply have to settle for an A :D

[gregbradley]

That's really very good Marcus.

Its quite a bright exposure you have there as this is a really dim galaxy.

Greg.

[Atmos]

Even with the bad seeing the detail in the centre of the galaxy is very pleasing. Yet it looks a bit better when zoomed out a bit BUT still very nice :)

[Stevec35]

Yep - you can see the effects of the bad seeing but it's still an okay image IMO Marcus.

Cheers

Steve

[marc4darkskies]

Thanks Peter. I'd take a B- ... maybe a B at a stretch. :lol:



Thanks Greg, it's as good as I can get it. Yes, it's a dim one alright so noise mitigation was also a challenge.



Thanks Colin. Decon / sharpening is more effective on high signal areas so I'd expect the core to be a bit crisper. Don't forget as well that it's only 70% full scale ... that always makes an image look "better".



Thanks Steve! My takeaway is that I at least managed to get out and do some imaging this lunar cycle. Processing a difficult dataset like this keeps me in practice too! :)

[Placidus]

Marcus, given the seeing, you've produced a superb image. Great depth, and beautifully processed.

Reckon it's worth adding some 2x2 binned colour (if it ever stops raining) because it seems to help differentiate stars and tiny distant galaxies.

[RobF]

Sums it up nicely really. Every image can't be a new personal best, especially when you have no control over conditions. This is way better than any 7424 I've managed. Thanks for sharing Marcus.

[marc4darkskies]

Thanks M&T! You're quite right of course - adding colour can add definition as you suggest. Alas, the forecast means gathering RGB in this lunar cycle for this object is probably over. I'm leaning towards leaving it on my todo list until next season and moving on.



Cheers Rob! Agreed, achieving a PB is not required, but I would like every image to be on par though.

[multiweb]

It turned out remarkably well given the circumstances. :thumbsup:

[marc4darkskies]

Thanks Marc!

[cometcatcher]

Thanks for the size correction. Stellarium has the size way too small. In that case I'll add it to my target list. 10' is worth a shot.

[Shiraz]

nothing too ordinary about that - it is a fiendishly hard galaxy to image and this is a good result. well done.