Messier 42 - The Great Nebula with modified camera

[PhotonCollector]

Hi everyone,

here's my first image of the Great Nebula in Orion (M42) with the modified Canon 300D. I did the image last night between Twilight and Moon rise, and just before the weather turned ugly again.

The image is composed from 6 x 3 minute exposures (18-minutes total) using ISO-200, on the 12-inch f/5 telescope with the Baader Coma Corrector. The images are dark-subtracted, flat-fielded and bias adjusted.

The core area of the nebula is composed from 3 x 15 second exposures used to mask out the over-exposed core in the deeper image.

Images were processed with IRIS with final adjustments in Photoshop and Noiseware CE.

There is a higher resolution image here http://www.skylab.com.au/pmsa/ngc1976c.html

Hope you all like it
Paul Mayo

[h0ughy]

Brilliant!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Stunning Image Paul, you have worked on that image with the magic wand!! Send that one in to the mags mate!

[davidpretorius]

not quite sure what to say, simply fantastic!

[Raydar]

Nice detail mate :thumbsup:

[tornado33]

Wow, its like a painting, so full of detail. And on top of that using a self modified camera :)
Did you ever think it was possible to take images like that back in the old days of film astrophotography?
Scott

[Striker]

Lovely shot Paul...lots and lots of detail.

Whats with all the blocks even in the high rez shot....whats cause's this.

[Itchy]

Fantastic image Paul!
:bowdown:

[PhotonCollector]

Thanks guys,

Glad you all liked the image. I wasn't to sure if I over did the image processing on this image, as Tornado33 said, it looks a little like an oil painting.

The dark frame subtraction in IRIS has really made a big difference to how well my images are turning out. If you don't already have an image processing system, I'd recommend IRIS (after all it's free and developed by an astrophotographer). When I first looked at IRIS it wasn't intuitive enough to begin using straight away, but after getting the initial gist of how it works it has all become clear now.

Anyhow, thanks again for your inspirations and kind comments.

Paul Mayo

[PhotonCollector]

I always aspired to be able to do images like this one in the old days of film, of course I soon realised it would be almost impossible without setting up my own color printing lab and even then film just didnt have the response to light that one needed to do images like this (especially in less than 20 minutes!).

It really makes me wonder what we might be able to do in say 10 or 20 years time from now. Maybe we'll have technology to open windows in the atmosphere and allow our 'scopes to peer into deep space unimpeded by the Earths atmosphere, or maybe NASA will decide the only way to keep the Hubble Telescope is to lease some of its time to amateur astronomers!

thanks, Paul

[PhotonCollector]

thanks Striker,

yes good question. It could be a case of Astro-Tiredness (ie too tired from doing the images to process them correctly) or it may be where I have pushed each light level to its limits (meaning; there is more nebula in the dark areas of the image which appears as a very faint greenish color).

I'll have another play with image processing to see if I can improve it by removing the blocky looking stuff.

clear skies :rofl:
Paul Mayo

[Vermin]

I feel a bit sheepish saying this as I have not had a go at processing astro images yet, and don't want to cause any offence, so feel free to ignore me completely if you disagree:

It looks a little over sharpened to me, this is clearly visible as black rings around the stars.

This over processing is visible in a lot of terrestrial images too: http://www.phototakers.com/articles/articles/34.html

[cometcatcher]

I can't see getting that amount of detail on film using a 12" scope. Maybe in a 36".

Processing style is a matter of personal preference. I remember seeing an image of M42 processed like this from the Lick Observatory I think it was once.

Also after staring at the computer screen for hours on end it's hard to know when to stop and when to keep going. Sometimes I keep a "base sample" pic along side as reference to keep processing similar to previous shots.

Personally I'm not a big fan of Noiseware. I'd rather see a bit of noise than the smearing effect it gives. But that's just me.

In all though it's a wonderful shot. I'd be really happy with a piccy half as good. :)

[PhotonCollector]

Hello Cometcatcher,

Yes I agree, sometimes after staring for too long, one can loose their way. Thanks for your comments.

Paul Mayo