The Seagull - two very different versions

[strongmanmike]

As I sometimes do :P ...here is a comparison, this time with an image by the UK Schmidt of this beautiful area.

I looked for a large version of the UK Schmidt shot but this was the biggest I could find on the web which isn't very big so I also had to reduce the resolution of my shot down too match.

You can read how the UK Schmidt shot was composed in the info under the image.

Anyway t'was just for fun...apart from the colour pallet, the results (http://www.pbase.com/strongmanmike2002/image/131747118/original) are surprisingly similar as far as image depth and details are concerned :)

Mike

[renormalised]

Very interesting comparison, Mike. Very similar shots :)

Your colour palette is the better one, though. That orange looks a little sickly in the AAO shot.

[tlgerdes]

I am actually the other way, I rather like the orange, I think the pinks in Mikes one are a little too pink for me.

The clarity of Mr Sidonios picture though, I think puts the the Schmidt to shame, considering the price and aperture difference.

[Alchemy]

Another interesting comparison, the 1200mm scope obviously outdoes the 150mm one ..... Duh..... However on a cost vs image basis mikes well ahead.
Interesting color difference, all the amatuer ones I've seen always have the pink rather than the orange, I haven't checked the details of the uk one but I make the assumption they have just used the alpha line and not included the beta one, even so i personally prefer a deep red if thats the case interesting just to see the detail in the faint reflection nebulosity around the head area.

Edit.... Will have a read on the bottom of the image for details of uk shot..... Hehe just looked at the picture.

Further edit... I see they've just used the red and blue plates, some amateurs have been doing that , downloading the different plates and combining them to create their own versions... It was in a mag a while back....

[h0ughy]

well i am going to say great stuff, or something to that extent ;)

[alexch]

Mike, you did it again, excellent stuff!!!
:bowdown:

Alex

[strongmanmike]

Cheers guys

Hmmm?..so is a 1.2m aperture F2.5 with a 400mm diameter corrected and illumated image circle, the ultimate imaging scope..? :question:

It's nice to see that modern technology has narrowed the gap considerably for the small fry though :thumbsup:

Mike

[mangrovedutch]

WOW, that is amazing and I mean that for both of them, excellent.

Regards, Dutch

[Leonardo70]

Congratulations Mike, you are a reference one for sure....:)
Stunning image...i think tomorrow may be an well deserve APOD :thumbsup:

Ciao,
Leo

[spearo]

Its simply amazing that in- relatively- short time span, we can produce images rivaling those of massive equipment 11 years ago.
frank

[Stevec35]

This is another indication of how much imaging technology has improved in the last 20 years if one was needed. Your version is a wonderful image Mike and clearly superior.

Steve

[avandonk]

It was designed for film, ie hypered tech pan from memory. Can you imagine what a colour/NB filter 400mm in diameter would cost? I would like to see it perform with a 400mm contiguous sized modern sensor as sensitive as Mikes. The needed exposures would be measured in a few seconds.

What also needs to be said is that the exquisite optical accuracy of Mikes 150mm optic with associated filters is barely matched by his sensor.

The old rule is still true. Nothing beats aperture!

There is also no point having more aperture and FoV than your sensor can collect!

How many of your sensors would it take to cover a 400mm plate Mike?

I think you will find it is about the same as the ratio of your optics aperture (in area) to the 1.2M UK Schmidt .

Bert

[strongmanmike]

Also used Kodak blue green senstive fine grain IIIaJ etc



CCD image scale = 1.4"/pix, 152EDF resolution 0.75", seeing >2"..?



Yeh, a type of fever is named after it even :P



KAI16803 sensor 37mm X 37mm = 1369sqmm

400mm plate = 160 000sqmm = 117 X 16803 sensors to cover the field :eyepop:

Hmm..?..maybe I could talk to the bank :D

6" APO objective = 18142sqmm

1.2m Objective = 3 551 943sqmm = 196 times more aperture area

I think that's right..:question:

Anyway Im upgrading to a 12" soon... so who knows what the future holds :thumbsup:

Mike

[Screwdriverone]

Hey....!

Just checked APOD and indeed a Mr Michael Sidonio has the current APOD with a pic, not unlike this one!

Congrats Mike, well done indeed!

Cheers

Chris

[Leonardo70]

:whistle::lol:

[Screwdriverone]

Yes,

VERY good call Leonardo.....your comment is what made me look.

Credit where credit is due...

Cheers

Chris

[marco]

Very much deserved Mike! This is an extremely fine shot of this area!!

Clear Skies
Marco

[strongmanmike]

Leonardo da Clairvoiant :)

and cheers Marco

[richardo]

Mike, big congrats with the APOD with this image.:thumbsup:

Well deserved.

All the best
Rich

[Martin Pugh]

Congrats on the APOD Mike.

Well done mate

Martin

[strongmanmike]

Thanks Richo and Marto

Martin, if I can just get the boys at APOD to answer "my" Bat Phone...another dozen times...:question:...and they don't answer yours, we will be neck and neck :P

Mike

[Paul Haese]

Nice image Mike and something that resembles the image I did below with my lowly 40D. Colour is natural as far as I can tell.

Click here (http://paulhaese.net/Seagullnebulangc2327part2.html) for my lowly 40D image.

Nice sharp detail but maybe the noise is a little too positive. I know that this object is reasonably dim and this would no doubt be contributing to the noise given the amount of time you have put into this image.

As for the APOD; well done but I reckon your M42 is sublime in comparison and much more deserving if I was choosing as too is your Helix. This is the fickle nature of those choosing APOD. Still a wonderful image but I believe you should have had several by now and the ones mentioned should have been there for sure.

[gregbradley]

Wow, congrats on your NASA APOD.

That's a great result.

Greg.

[mill]

The only thing better in the Schmit is that the stars are smaller :P
For the rest it is the same Michael so that is a BIG :thumbsup: up (who say's bigger is better ? ).
And congrats on the apod :).

[strongmanmike]

:) ...Yeh but don't forget I used a mono CCD and larger scope so you would expect superior resolution and detail. I think your red is a little toooo red, needs more blue-magenta for sure but hey, 6 of one in the end....




Yeh?..I was quite hapy with the noise levels in the end actually, very low as far as I was concerned. I don't like to see an image that has obvious smoothing, this looks worse in my opinion but each to there own I guess?



Yes like imaging contests ;)... in this case it comes down to the opinion, likes and dislikes etc of two NASA scientists - that's just how it is, can be a little frustrating at times but not worth getting too hung up about it I've decided :thumbsup:

Thnaks for the comments mate

Mike

[strongmanmike]

he he cheers Greg, if I had an SBIG camera I recon I'd have a couple more :lol:



Thanks Marto

Dunno about the same but certainly not as much in it as you might expect :thumbsup:

Mike

[CoolhandJo]

Well deserved. Top shot!

[multiweb]

Top shot as usual. Inspirational and congrats on another APOD. :thumbsup::thumbsup::thumbsup:

[strongmanmike]

Cheers Marc and Paul

My web hits have sky rocketed over the last 36hrs so that means many people have enjoyed this image all over the world and that makes me smile :)

Mike

[starfinder]

Well done, Mike. Congrats on your APOD. I much prefer your version to that of the 1.2m Schmidt!

[Bassnut]

Top work on the APOD Mike, congrats.

The blue/red contrast pops out, and the detail in the dark highlights make all the difference.

[strongmanmike]

Thanks Russ, I would love a 1.2m F2.5 fully corrected astrograph with 350mm X 350mm chip/s though :D



Hey Fred where you been...? Miss your ..?.."comments" :sadeyes:, managed to still find an excuse or two to post your photo lately though :D

Bah! APOD SHMAPOD :shrug: :whistle:

;)