NGC 7184 & Co

[Dave882]

Rainy days have given me the incentive to process some projects that had been waiting in vain for some more data. Here's 10hrs on a small but interesting spiral galaxy: NGC7184. I'm really short on data from my B7 location, but I think there's just enough to scrape together an image. The field also includes NGC 7185 and NGC 7180, as well as a hoard of tinny fuzzies that are just begging for some more data (or darker sky) to punch through the noise.

Larger higher res version here
(https://storage.googleapis.com/dso-browser.com/astrophotography/picture-52e154a4393c0d4ca3bf9141440e67d8-original.jpg)
C14 non edge @f7 with the Starizona reducer LF
EQ8 pro
Asi2600mc pro gain 100
Asi220mm / celestron OAG
ZWO EAF
ASIAIR+ / APP / PI / LR

Comments and suggestions welcome. Thanks for looking!

[TrevorW]

Nicely done David the higher resolution image stunning ;)

[strongmanmike]

That's a great shot Dave, especially from big city suburban skies :thumbsup: Perhaps the background looks kinda jet black but I guess considering your skies that was from dealing with gradients, maybe? Gee NGC 7184 looks decidedly like M65 in Leo, huh?

Another nice job from your workhorse C14 :)

Mike

[Startrek]

Dave,
Lovely Galaxy image with faint fuzzies sprinkled everywhere
Nothing beats aperture and focal length when it comes to tiny faint galaxies and your 14” is just perfect
Gee I wish I had some previous stock data to work on , maybe I’ve missed too many clear nights in the past year ? My cupboards empty

Well done !!

Martin

[Dave882]

Thanks Trevor! Yep the 200kb limit stifles it a bit - i use the free hosting on Telescopius it’s so easy to link the larger version. Certainly makes a difference!

[Dave882]

Yeah there were some woeful gradients to deal with on this one lol I can’t get anything past you mate! And yes it’s got a similar structure to m65- just smaller, dimmer and 100Mly away… perhaps that’s why it doesn’t get much attention from Astro imagers! Might suit someone with a big scope on a dark mountaintop somewhere :P

[Dave882]

Thank you kindly Martin. I normally need to get 20-30hrs to do justice to faint broadband targets like this and can tell I’ve probably not exposed as much detail as I’d like but sometimes you take what you can get.
I’ve got a couple of other data sets that have been parked for a bit while I procrastinate processing them. Normally it’s cause I know the data’s going to be a pain to work with!