Orion Star Field - SBIG STX - Full-Sized Image Uploaded

[Martin Pugh]

Hello all
been off-line for a while, what with lots of travel and a heavy winter.

So this image has been in the making for a good while....plenty Orions around and its still the season.

I was pleased to see that this fit in a single FOV of the STX/FSQ combination.

about 19 hours in all, plus extra Ha of just the Horsehead blended in too. 19 hours at f5? testament to my very poor skies here.

hope you like it and thanks for looking as always.

http://tinyurl.com/ya8o4th

cheers
Martin

[mick pinner]

now that is nothing less than brilliant.

[CoolhandJo]

Apod stuff here! The richness of the colours and how they blend into the various shades is something I havn't seen before of this region. Even when zoomed in the detail is splendid. Worth the 19 hours for sure :)

[multiweb]

:eyepop: That is a huge field. Fantastic work Martin! :thumbsup::thumbsup::thumbsup:

[jase]

Lovely result Martin which shows the gear off nicely, but to be pedantic the FOV is too tight. Two frame mosaic would have done the scene justice. Also M42 core looks colour less. All other accounts this is a top shelf image. Well done.

[AlexN]

I agree with Jase, its nice, but a little claustrophobic.. That said, its easily 4x my FOV with my 480mm FL.. :) The 16803 is awesome! :) Also think that M42's blending seems a bit obvious and rough.. That said, its better than any or my attempts. .

[Rigel003]

Go easy guys. I think this is just magnificent, Martin. Fantastic image of an amazing area. Great colour and sharpness and packed with detail all over.

[desler]

That really is something quite special! Nicely done.


Darren

[iceman]

Stunning image, Martin. The colour and smoothness are amazing.
Scrolling around the full-res is amazing.

I agree about the tightness of the FOV but i'm sure you can add to it later with a few more panels.

Brilliant.

[LGT150]

Magnifique grand champ image très fine j'adore
Amicalement Lucien.

[RobF]

Wow. The talk of mosaics makes me realise this already feels like 4 or 9 panels from a normal camera/OTA combination stitched together. I think I spent 5-10 mins on the HH/flame region alone.

Tour de force stuff

[h0ughy]

wow - now that just makes you want to cry. Simply stunning....

[JD2439975]

Wow...that hit me like a brick when the page loaded, stunning.
Well worth your 19 hours Martin & thank you for sharing.

My only criticism is of my monitor...it's just not big enough to take in all that beauty.
True a mosaic could make it even more magnificent, say 8 panels surrounding it...thats only a mere 152 hours to go. :eyepop: :lol:

Justin.

[strongmanmike]

Really lovely shot Martin, I don't think it looks too crowded really :shrug:

That's a BIG FOV for one frame :eyepop:

Have you noticed any RBI with the 16803 chip or had to use the RBI flush feature at all?

Mike

[astroron]

It looks beautiful to me:eyepop: to my eye there is nothing wrong with it:thumbsup:,

[gregbradley]

Fabulous image Martin and an interesting conundrum. Your FSQ106N is showing off the fluorite elements with the rich colour. You most likely would not have gotten that richness of colour from the later FSQ106ED.

Yet the FSQ106ED has a reducer available that enables you to get a wider FOV easily (I have done the same shot) albeit at a lower resolution.

I feel the FSQ106N is the better scope overall for imaging despite the
convenience of some of the FSQ106ED's features.

But in this case it would require 2 panels ideally. You got some terrific richness of colour though that is spectacular and really makes the image.

Then again that reducer on the FSQ106Ed is a beauty. I wonder if someone could make a reducer for the 106N. For that matter I wonder if the new reducer does in fact work on the FSQ106N?

Greg.

[Martin Pugh]

Hello all

and thanks for the great feedback....no one minds criticism, and I certainly do not. In fact, the comment about the colourless centre of M42 was spot on - in fact, I did address this, but in a later processing stage, obviously forgot to reenable that layer!

Anyway, I have addressed this now and fixed it back up.
Not sure I agree with the Alex's comment about M42 though - looks fine to me.

Mike - no RBI at all in this camera, despite deliberate attempts to produce it....Unless I am not seeing it.

Greg - I couldnt agree more - the damn holding clips in the FSQ106N produce those horrible arefacts in all the bright stars. I assume Tak fixed this in the ED?

I also agree entirely about the framing - it goes against all the usual rules - but I just couldnt resist doing this in a single effort.

thanks again everyone - hope you like the reprocessed core of M42 now.

cheers
Martin

[plmilligan1968]

Firstly, I am amazed that the entire image fits into a single field of view.
Secondly, I am amazed with 19 hours exposure time - wow!
Thirdly, I am amazed with the photo.

A truly stunning widefield image showing awesome detail!

Amazing, I would definately submit this to APOD, if you do good luck getting it published, it fully deserves to be shown!!

Clear skies
Paul M..

[Lester]

Thanks for the fantastic view Martin.

All the best.

[marc4darkskies]

A very lovely shot Martin, well done! :thumbsup::thumbsup:

Aaah yes, the old forgot-to-leave-the-adjustment-layer-visible trick - done that one myself ;) but much better with the colour back in the core! While I don't particularly like the framing I sure can appreciate how nice it must be to fit that FOV in one frame!! :) Also, I'd have expected 19hrs would have let you bring out the deep neb a bit more strikingly (?) I guess with all the blizzards you've been having over there good transparency must be rare? The transparency in Sydney is nothing special either - zero most nights :mad2:!

Cheers, Marcus

[Martin Pugh]

Thanks again everyone

Marcus - you are spot on with your diagnosis of my skies here. Clarity is non-existent and I am heavily light polluted. Processing has taken on a significant new challenge.

Teasing out the background nebulosity any further would have simply made it too noisy. I couldnt quite believe the noise there as it was, after 19 hours of data.

cheers
Martin

[danielsun]

Wow Martin , I just went for my space walk in your image and spent quite a while in there too.
That is a truly incredible image!!


Cheers Daniel.

[strongmanmike]

This seems to be the general concesus with the 16803 chip, while theoretically it should or could suffer from RBI, in practise few actually notice it. It is probably measurable but not causing noticable issues for most as far as I can tell? Good really as flushing adds noise so I was concerned it would be a choice between a slight ghost image and increased noise ie which is worse? :question:

Thanks for the feedback. My ProLine16803 will be here in a few days and I am getting just a bit excited :D...an FSQ would be nice too :thumbsup:

Mike

[gregbradley]

Yes the artifacts in bright edge stars in the 106N was corrected with the 106ED.

What temp did you get your STX to?

Greg.

[Martin Pugh]

Hi Greg
this beta unit has a cooling issue - so I have maintained it at -25degs and cooler power has been down to around 5-10%!!!

Mike - for some reason, the FLI 16803 cameras do suffer from RBI - which is why Crisp writes so much about it on the FLI website and his own.

I have just not been able to find any with the STX.

Cheers
Martin

[Octane]

Martin,

That is exquisitely wonderful.

I can't believe how smooth it all looks. Just amazing.

Thanks, mate.

H

[gregbradley]

That's interesting about the RBI Martin I'll have to check that out.
Not sure how it would appear in the image and haven't noticed anything but that is not much of test.

What was the ambient temperature when you got -25?

I am finding I get 51.7C delta temperature cooling power from the FLI PL but I found with other cameras I seem to get less cooling than advertised except the FLI ML8300 which will slam down -62C or more. I did one image at -45C! I wonder if cooling power is affected by relative humidity. My area is dry where I image. Would that make it more or less efficient I wonder? I assume wetter humidity would hinder cooling but perhaps its the other way around.

Greg.

[strongmanmike]

Can't see why it would be a camera related issue? RBI is a chip specific issue.

Seems everyone who actually uses the PL16803 says it is not an issue :confuse3:. The ProLIne 16803 has been available now for over 3 years too, Wolfgang Promper never thought it was an issue with his PL16803 and he had one of the earlier versios too :shrug:. Tom Davis and Greg Bradley don't see it in there PL16803's either. I am wondering if it is an issue that only shows up in extreme circumstances or isn't noticable to the eye in most instances but rather only with careful measurements?

Anyway, you had an FLI PL16803, did you notice any RBI with that?

Mike

[Tom Davis]

Nice image Martin!

Tom

[AG Hybrid]

Fantastic image. Ive not seen anything the like of it! :)

[Martin Pugh]

Thanks Tom/AG

Mike - I am sure you have done all of your research when you selected your 16803 based camera! If you have concerns regarding residual image and FLI cameras (which you do not appear to), then I would discuss with FLI/CRISP.

anyway, enough said, suffice it to say, that my experience was very bitter indeed - much like your ASA experience.

learned my lesson.
cheers
Martin

[duncan]

Hi Martin,
A truly stunning image!!!!! Don't know what else to say as it has already been said. And yeah go for APOD.!!!

Cheers,
Duncan:eyepop::thumbsup:

[TrevorW]

I must confess that is one fine image now just add too the FOV and you have your Marlin for this year ???

:thumbsup::thumbsup::thumbsup:

[Martin Pugh]

Thanks very much Trevor/Duncan

unfortunately, I am not allowed to enter David Malin awards this year (or last or next) as I am not resident in Australia (working overseas in US at the moment) :mad2:

cheers
Martin

[Paul Haese]

What struck me right from opening this image is how smooth it is. As having done a 21 hours image myself I know that data can get very smooth. In your case this image is buttery (if such a word exists and if not it does now ;)), that being the background has no noise whatsoever and yet retains very good resolution. Some of us like to have some noise to aid sharpness but here the image does not seem to need it.

My only criticism and you already have addressed this is the core of M42. Everything else is superb.

Good luck with the APOD submission. I submitted my Thor's Helmet and did not get looked at. You have been published before and should feature on the site again.

[strongmanmike]

Well yes I believed I had...?

I didn't know this, so are you saying RBI was the route of your bitterness, or something else?

My ASA experience was yes, ****e, if a scope has astigmatism it has astigmatism an mine did, badly. :(

Mike

[Hagar]

What a load of cods wallop. Processing will lift, lower or transcribe the colour to whatever the imager requires. The same image captured with the same equipment and given to 20 people to process will result in 20 different images both in colour depth and end result.

Sorry Martin, a truely magnificent image with a huge field of view with superb detail throughout.

[gregbradley]

What you are saying is true Doug but I am looking past the processing at the performance of the scope and its coatings. Not all scopes coatings are equally effective. Ask Roland Christen from AP or Yuri from TEC. That is what I observed having used both scopes so the processing is constant from myself in each instance. The 106N gives richer colours no doubt about it. I think some FSQ owners who have used both are aware of this. But yes that is given processing as a constant and it is a huge variable but if the colour data was affected in the imaging then it is not there to assign or shift around in Photoshop as much as you think.

Greg.

[TrevorW]

There are numerous factors which will determine the colour in a final image that are not specifically tied into processing where processing is kept simple such as

1. Scope
2. Seeing
3. LP
4. SNR
5. Sensitivety of camera used

although what you say about colour being subjective is also true as per this article

http://www.space.com/scienceastronomy/astronomy/color_universe_020625-1.html

however to refer to Greg's statement as cods wallop Dougie, may be a bit harsh IMO

Keep it polite.

:thanx:

[gregbradley]

I might also add it is getting pretty picky to fault the FSQ106ED on its coatings. Don't get the wrong idea, it is a super scope and this is quite a minor point. I love my FSQ106ED and the reducer in particular is sensational.

Anyway back to Martins wonderful image.

Greg.

[telecasterguru]

I have only one word for the image, Balanced.

Frank

[Peter Ward]

Simply sublime Martin.

BTW I can't enter the Malin's so far this year either...FW-STX but... no filters....sigh....

[Martin Pugh]

Thanks very much Frank/Peter

you must be pretty frustrated with not being able to use the STX Peter. What is the delay?

For those who might be interested, I have now uploaded the full-size version of this image (the one previously posted was 60% in size).

You can view that here - http://tinyurl.com/ygtr7wj

also made a few contrast enhancements to this version.

clear skies and thanks for looking.

Martin

[multiweb]

That's awesome Martin. :thumbsup: You got to keep going and mosaic the whole area. That should take you only 3 more panels at that rate :lol: ;)