Reprocessed Eta carina heaps more detail

[tornado33]

Hi all
Ive reprocessed an Eta Carina Neb shot I took a few weeks ago with the 6 inch f3.6 SN
6x10 mins ISO400. Baader UHCS filter and MPCC coma corrector. Hutech modded 350D.
Taken from my suburban back yard where the LMC is only just visible to the naked eye.
Not bad for a 20 year old telescope and an even older mount. Both corrector plate and main mirror of the SN are ordinary green plate glass, what was at the time a "cheap n nasty" scope that only cost a few hundred dollars, very cheap back in the 1980's. Look how cheap standard newtonians are today
I should point out a few modern additions like the camera of course and also the q guider camera but that still requires hand guiding a star image on the laptop pc.
The whole shooting match, including the Hutech modded camera and laptop cost me less than the cost of a STL11 on its own with no scope or even a filterset and wheel :)

One final advantage. If necessary it can be used in the field without a PC. I used to manually guide with an illuminated recticle before the Q guider came along. The drive corrector that runs the mounts RA drive draws about 0.6 amps 12V, so even a small SLA battery lasts a very long time in the field.
Scott

[PhotonCollector]

:eyepop: OMG amazing

[h0ughy]

pretty ordinary shot that scott !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[Astrod00d]

Wow! I think you've just set a new standard! :bowdown:

Cheers,

Rob

[monoxide]

thats an excellent image Scott, well processed.

[Ric]

Nice imaging Scott, so rich and detailed.

A fine image.

[tornado33]

Thanks all
Heres a bigger version (http://www.iceinspace.com.au/uploads/etacar6x10minsiso400uhcs6inchqghigh lights2smallstars.jpg)

This (http://www.astronomy-images.com/Articles/reducing-star-bloat.htm) is the proceedure I use with Photoshop. Images Plus has star size reduction built in. The PS method is a bit hit and miss, not all my images benefit as well as this Eta carina pic did
I suspect a lot of astro imagers employ some sort of star size reduction in their processing.
Mainly in rich starfields it helps. In shots with my 10 inch scope especially in less dense starfields it may not be needed.
Scott

[prokyon]

The bigger version is wonderful, so many details :eyepop:

[Kirkus]

Hot diggity!! Look at that! Outstanding.

[theodog]

Nice one Scott.

[leon]

Agreed, that is a hell of a nice image, as mentioned, high standard of imaging, well done.

Leon

[Garyh]

Excellent!
The 6" gives just the right FOV for a stunning shot
:thumbsup:

[seeker372011]

top shot and nicely processed so it looks very pleasing

[Matty P]

:2thumbs:

Absolutely amazing image Scott. So much detail and lovely colour.

Very well done. :thumbsup:

[Alchemy]

nice shot scott, i found the minimum filter tends to introduce halos even with extending and feathering, particularly in Nebs. But youve done it very well..... well done.

cheers clive

[Lester]

An image to be proud of, well done Scott.

[jase]

Agree, a good image considering (or not considering) the equipment age. Though you've only mentioned hardware. We all know image processing is what makes or breaks an image. Finely polish a bit of tin and stick a camera on end, then let the smoke and mirrors of image processing turn it into a master piece.;)

[tornado33]

Many thanks all

Here is what happens when I process an image taken with the 10 inch scope the same way
Image is just 3x10 mins ISO400, Hutech LPS filter, 10 inch f5.6 newtonian, hand guided with off axis guider and Q guider cam.

Yes Clive youre right, and indeed I had quite a few goes with different settings, some made noticable haloes and grossly distorted stars, others not enough impact, so yes had a few goes at it before settling on this one. It is indeed amazing what processing can do.

The old days of film was submitting exposed film to the photolabs and going with what was printed. A lucky few with film scanners could do some processing but the pc capacity and software we now have just wasnt around. I think we are going to see real good images from Pauls modded 450D, with its 14 bit 12 MP images in the near future.

Scott

[strongmanmike]

Hi Scott

While I'm not too fussed on the orange colour you have come up with here :rolleyes: the resolution is pretty tidy! Can you post a bigger file? Just above the waterfall that cascades out of the keyhole there is a feature, the presence of which indicates good resolution particularly if it is sharpley defined. It is a kind of depression in the gasses, like a canyon and shapped like a chefs hat (or kings crown) pointing down at the 7 o'clock position at the head of the keyhole in your image. At the file size you have posted I can make it out ok but I think it would be more obvious at fuller res?

Mike

[tornado33]

Thanks Mike. Yes I think I see what you refer to there. It can just be seen here (http://www.iceinspace.com.au/uploads/etacarina3x10minsiso400lps10inchchi lly2smallstarsb.jpg)
Note, the processing isnt 100% here, there is some haloes round stars of certain brightness. Ive done the star size reduction just using normal Photoshop functions, I guess a dedicated function to reduce star sizes might do as good a job without any haloes or other artifacts. Anyway I can see a faint depression with 2 stars in it. The "Finger of God" can also be seen above the keyhole. Youve got a good pic of it on your home page I see :) Its sheer co incidence the diffraction skiles are running vertical and horozontal, as being an off axis guider, they can be at any angle depenting on where the camera is rotated.
Scott

[jase]

Yes, I've used it a few times. M52 (http://www.cosmicphotos.com/gallery/image.php?fld_image_id=121&fld_album_id=10) is an example. I wanted to ensure the open cluster maintained good star colour.
Tip re: the minimum filter; If your halos are severe, you selection is to large or feathering too much. If follow the routine provided by Scott, don't stop at step 4. I extend this by a few additional steps, these are;
If required Expand or Contract selection to cover star and slight edge of star
Feather to taste (if you've got halos you may need feather by quite a few pixels
Filter | Blur | Radial Blur - around 40 usually does the trickYou can do this on a separate layer, then blend it in with a selection mask in screen mode. That way you can alter the opacity and colour saturation purely on the stars and not impact anything else. This still calls for some trial and error. With time you'll gain more experience with what works best.

I will acknowledge that the minimum filter is rather nasty. I don't use it often. If you want to get your stars tight and colourful, deconvolution, followed by a strong DDP stretch and saturation boost works well. This is one of my preferred routines. Blend this layer in as soft light in PS (mask if desired). Make sure your DDP stretch is hard i.e. on the verge of being white clipped - this is important as the PS soft light blend is actually a darkening function, hence will alter your overall image histogram if not careful. If you don't do a hard DDP stretch you can still layer it on top of the original, but at an opacity of around 50%, then flatten and relayer again to get the same affect.

[tornado33]

many thanks for those excellent tips Jase, will save them for future reference :)
Scott

[EzyStyles]

absolutely beautiful shot scott coming out from the 450D. i havent been on IIS for a few days and so much has happen. I wonder how it will look with a modified 450D?
keep them coming scott, don't stop :)

[tornado33]

Thanks
I should mention these were taken with my modded 350D. The 450D will rock if modded thats for sure
Scott

[ozstockman]

Hi Scott,

Very well done. Actually these are the best shots of ETA Carina I have ever seen.

cheers,

Mike