Quote:
|
Couldn't get near Mike's beaut image, but was still pleased at the result.
|
Well it's pretty bloody close Ray!..an excellent image of this tiny blighter!
Quote:
|
A lot of processing was required to control the dynamic range - and the stars and noise show the damage. Have also tried to ensure that the masking did not introduce "features" - but there may be some spurious structure and I intend to do a careful reprocess to check/correct. Also have some RGB and will tidy up the stars when the winter sets in and astronomy stops.
|
I agree Ray, the processing required on this one was indeed difficult. I also totally agree that it is always important to make sure ones processing doesn't introduce spurious, shall we say, "make believe" detail or features and yes masks and lassoing as well as Decon, wavelettes and selective curves and sharpening etc can easily create bogus features and detail when processing objects like this one...in fact most objects really? However, in science when one reveals potential new and/or faint structures etc, in fact
any structures really, in an image, they mean
very little until they can be confirmed in separately collected data...so, here is a comparison of my results with another very deep image taken by the CTIO guys using a 16" RC under the excellent skies of Cerro Tololo observatory at 2200m up in the Andes:
CTIO vs Wallaroo
Clearly all our structures and faint outer details match essentially perfectly...so they
must be real
...also the OIII extends right into the outer shells and not just inside the central oval.
Again a great result Ray
Mike