M20 and M8

[DJT]

After a couple of dramas I worked this up from data collected at SPSP this year

http://astrob.in/298633/B/

Nod of the head to Logan and Marc for kind advice and a loan of a bhatimov mask following some focuser dramas (user issues).

35 subs @ 300 sec

AP900, FSQ106N, Canon 60Da

Interestingly darks not needed, just dithered heavily and used Bias. Not a patch on Colins recent very widefield one but happy with where this is at.



Thanks for looking

[Placidus]

Hi David,
That's a really nice composition with pleasant colour and contrast. We especially like the golden bit of milky way below the Lagoon. Beach sand, perhaps.

[strongmanmike]

An excellent image David, colour, composition overall processing, all good, well done :thumbsup:

I don't do darks (or bias) either with my SX H694 camera, just dither and median combine - easy huh? :)

Mike

[RickS]

Nice one, David!

[DJT]

Thanks Rick. I still have the example image from last years tutorial in Sydney. Might need to do a spot check against that..



Aah, now then...real men just dither and bias with uncooled DSLR,s.
It does help though that's it's a pretty bright object with shedloads of background stars. I have the area around M87 as well but there just wasn't enough data compared to this so it's as noisy as a campanologist,s busmans holiday. By te way, thanks for the comments!




Thank you very much, MnT. I seem to recall there is some pretty faint ha around there so yup, subtle.very beach indeed.

Cheers all

[marc4darkskies]

Really well done Dave and nicely processed! Nuanced and pleasing colour balance plus good depth showing the fainter neb throughout the frame and around the borders of both objects.

[Atmos]

Really nice David, far better framed than mine, better framed than both my M8 & M20 :P
The high res looks good too.

I have found that with my DSLRs I need darks to help with a little bit of amp glow. It isn't TOO bad but it is difficult to remove without darks. The D700 had some strange banding that I cannot get rid of without matching darks, the D7200 has amp glow and I haven't actually stacked anything un-calibrated from the D810.

I just take my darks while I am packing up the telescope so I can get a number of them easily enough.

[DJT]

THanks Markus, glad you like the processing and thanks for commenting.



Really interested to see what you do with the 810..Carolyn has this camera and won't let me anywhere near it..it's really very good. Leaving out the anti alias filter and the fact it's their highest res DSLR could make quite an impact

There's a canon banding script in PI that you might look at. I also found using super bias was helpful as well, though no idea why that would be.

Thanks for the comments

[multiweb]

Missed than one. Nice fov with great details. Colors are spot on too. Just need to be mirrored. :thumbsup::thumbsup::thumbsup:

[traveller]

Very nice David.
Great fov and detail!
Bo

[Ryderscope]

Well done David. Nice work.

[astronobob]

Grouse going there David, the blue around the triffid is showing up really well too :thumbsup:
Great processing done considering the thick star field, and the variety of fainter dust structures are well brought out for 5 min subs :thumbsup:
The joys of dark skies huh :D
Gotts'ta be very happy with that beauty !!

[Retrograde]

Really nice David. Lovely detail in the Lagoon and the blue reflection nebulosity around the Trifid is brought out nicely.

Personally I would go for a bit more saturation but as I'm inclined to overdo the saturation on my own images take that with a grain of salt or two. :D

[DJT]

Dang..Spotted! Have corrected geometry on the thumbnail. Weird as the individual subs were fine. Must be something in the way this got stacked as there was a meridian flip involved somewhere.



Thanks very much Bo. Not bad detail with the Canon.


Thanks very much.


Indeed, Dark Skies rock. Thanks for comments. I had loads of issues doing star registration with this that was caused by using an incorrect Bayer Matrix in PI. Been a while since I have done any DSLR processing.

Just had to look up what Grouse meant in Urban dictionary. I reckon you must be the only person I see using this but apparently its common usage in Melbourne? Thanks!



Thanks. I just took a quick look at the saturation after reading your nice comments but going to leave as is I think. :thumbsup:

[SimmoW]

That's a lovely field there David.

I hope you don't mind, but I reprocessed your image for you, a few glare filters added by my amazing phone app, and a slight increase in saturation and a teensy crop to highlight the main target (that Trifid is never that spectacular anyway)

Hope you like it! And I hope you have a sense of humour :sadeyes:

[DJT]

Wow, I could really do with that phone app,
but what I really mean is, WTF? Mods!
but in closing I would have to say it does show great imaginative use of technology in complex image processing

Andy? Is that a SH?t Sandwich? :P

Now excuse me as my wife has just cut up my food for me and I must go and eat

[alpal]

Excellent shot David,
the amount of blue you have captured around the Trifid is amazing.
The FSQ106 is a fine scope.

cheers
Allan

[strongmanmike]

Wow that looks great, like some images taken with very expensive RC's I've seen over the years, when bright stars are around outside the field...so don't worry there are certainly some good star flare removal techniques that could address the issues presented here :P

[Atmos]

Looks more like the moon is just out of field ;) Also some pretty nasty internal reflections so you may want to address those as well.

[DJT]

Sighs heavily..

Allan, thanks very much for your comments. It's a great scope, just wish it came with clear skies.

[lazjen]

Nice image - I see that the FOV is very similar to what I can get with my Sharpstar 107PH + 0.6 reducer - so I might have a go at this combo myself sometime.

Do you use a reducer with your scope?

[gregbradley]

Nice image David. The background stars are nicely handled and often the hardest part of imaging this area.

Greg.

[DJT]

Thanks Greg, much appreciated.




Hi Chris. Thanks for. Am at F5 and haven't looked at getting a reducer. Looking at your plucked chick it's a similar FOV so it should be fine. Good luck :thumbsup: