The Lagoon

[Peter Ward]

....small bugs still make getting deep remote data a challenge....none the less..the system seems to work and here is installment number 2.

http://www.atscope.com.au/BRO/gallery28.html

A vanilla target, but nice and bright so I don't have to log on for hours via the net.

[strongmanmike]

Ok next we want to see one that was actually acquired while you were in the air between Aust and the US...or was this already? :eyepop:

Amazing.... you must be quietly tickled?

Right!...my son want's to become a pilot...now I think I will invest in him :thumbsup:

Mike

[Peter Ward]

:rofl:

Despite rumors to the contrary...the autoflight systems need constant monitoring, so I might pass on image acquisition while at work.

I'm pretty pleased with the system. Hands on is still *way* better.

It's pretty hard to judge the seeing (other than clear/cloudy) from a few thousand clicks away......but given my circumstances this is proving to be a very workable system.


...glad you liked the result!

[leon]

Yea and I liked the result as well Peter that is some awesome imaging from afar.

leon

[iceman]

Another lovely result, Peter. Very saturated around the edges? Very deep red/pink.

Do you process remotely or does that wait until you get home?

[strongmanmike]

I was just thinking Peter, it must be intriguing, maybe comforting or just plain annoying for your wife, who I assume is at home when you are away, to hear your observatory whir into action and start moving around? I can just see her out at the cloths line one evening, suddenly the still night air is broken, buuuuz, whiiir, click.."ah, there's Peter again with his obsession..." at least she knows when you have landed, careful she can track your movements better now :P. Has she had to do any night assisting for you yet, or been on stand by?

Mike

[Peter Ward]

Given the interesting discussion over the colour of H-alpha, the deep red edges are intentional....might need some more tweaking, but I like the dynamic range it gives the image. I do most of the image processing at home (I use a quad core 64 bit grunt machine for that)...just too much data to shift around via the web.



So far no, the little lady has not received a 2.00am callout....I suspect if she did the problem would be fixed with an axe :)

[gregbradley]

A fabulous image. Your 14.25 RCOS is awesome.

On the topic of what colour Ha really is, there was a very informative post where I started a thread on Astromart.

Here it is:

http://tinyurl.com/4zrrqj

One point about deciding that Ha must be dark red because the filter looks very red when put up to a white light- the Astrodon type mirror filters look odd colours when you look at them. For example the red filter initially looks blue and the blue filter looks orange as it is reflecting unwanted wavelengths.

Per the article it shows Ha as red and lower emission lines as deep red. So perhaps plain ole red is correct after all.

Greg.

[Peter Ward]

Glad you liked the image...

I'm not an Astromart member...is there an alternative link?

Despite not having read the discussion....I'd make the observation that it is irrelevant to the colour of H-Alpha discussion as to what a filter *reflects*.

The *transmitted* colour (ie what you eye/sensor actually "sees" ) is everything.

Monitors do not have any pixels "redder" than 620 nm (plus or minus about 10nm).

The brightness (ie amplitude) of a colour does not change its wavelength....hence the best we can do is make LCD/CRT's deepest red (620nm) look a little darker (ie lower amplitude) to try and give an illusion of even longer wavelengths (eg H-alpha at 652nm).

[Craig_L]

That is so 3-dimensional. Wonderful!:eyepop:

[gregbradley]

[quote=Peter Ward;368469]Glad you liked the image...

I'm not an Astromart member...is there an alternative link?


Here it is ;

http://tinyurl.com/442rf5

I understand the idea that the monitor won't do lower than 620nm or so. But aren't the deeper colours of red still displayed as they are a mix of other colours that can be displayed? For example deep crimson red would be beyond 656.3nm yet you can get that colour in an image or in a palette. So does that mean the monitor uses other colours within its scope to make that look?

I am not sure but you can get a deep crimson colour on a monitor though.
Colour is a slippery one for sure.

Anyway that link settled it for me at least. I concluded the assignment of red that Photoshop uses is close enough for Jazz.

See what you think.

Greg.

[Peter Ward]

Greg, thanks for the link.

Sorry, your understanding of monitor colours is not correct.

The best analogy I can give is, lets say we allocate the H-alpha frequency
to the lowest frequency we can play on a piano : AO# about 27Hz.

But the lowest frequency our monitor can "play" is unfortunately an octave higher, around 58Hz. Its still a low note...and going back into the light spectrum, we still call it red.

Yet no matter what other keys (colours) , or combinations of keys (adding green and blue pixels to the mix) we play on our piano, we physically can't make a note lower than AO#.

Playing the note loud (bright) or soft (dark) will not change the pitch (ie frequency).

H-Alpha is still at a frequency we can see, but it is simply not one which will reproduce faithfully on *any* monitor (piano) currently available, regardless of any software used to drive (play) it.

Hope that makes sense.

[gregbradley]

Fair enpugh.

So the conclusion on all this is to assign a deep red or simply red?

Greg.

[Peter Ward]

The brightest and deepest red any monitor can do is, R255: G zero : B zero.

The darkest is R 1 :G zero : B zero.

They are all the same hue.

That said, its really up to you as to how you want to portray the data knowing the underlying display limitations.

[spearo]

Fantastic shot
love the ridges on the red veils of cloud, truly 3D in appearance
beautiful,
the the dollars comes back up i may well start thinking about a CCD!

frank