[Placidus (Mike and Trish)]

Originally Posted by cometcatcher

Wow! This thing is faint but one would never know going by the image.

Thanks, Kevin!

Originally Posted by jwoody

Wow, very nice. Such detail.
As you said all those background galaxies....

Cheers
Jeremy

Ta, Jeremy.

Originally Posted by alocky

Lovely treatment of a tricky target, even under the wonderfully dark skies you must have. This is definitely an image where the compressed version does it no justice at all, the original full-resolution file at the end of the link kept me amused for a long time, just crawling about the galaxy and looking at all the nicely resolved HII regions.
regards,
Andrew.

Thanks Andrew! The sky is quite dark. We park the Polaris Ranger ATV about 30 metres from the observatory and a bit downhill, so that when we turn the headlights on it doesn't wreck the photo. Trying to find the vehicle in the dark usually means walking around until we bump into it. One can see the lights of Orange, Bathurst, and Dubbo in the distance, but incredibly, it is still Sydney, some 312 Km away, that is the brightest. We'd guess we're closer to Bortle 3 than 4.

Originally Posted by gregbradley

A very nice deep version of NGC6744. I have imaged this one a few times and its quite faint. It also seems a bit harder to get good autoguiding that far south as well. Plus its quite low even at its high point so seeing can be considerably worse down there.

A couple of points. There is a tinge of excess green in the image throwing off the colour balance a little. HLVG free plug in for Photoshop cleans it up as does SCNR in Pixinsight. I think green is a common issue even at dark sites as that is the common colour of airglow in our neck of the planet. Doing a lot of nightcapes has revealed to me just how much nightglow is commonly around. I see it quite a lot at my dark site and sometimes its really strong. I often wondered why I would get excess green at my dark site despite virtually no light pollution. Doing nightscapes showed me why.

The other is the black point. The background on my monitor seems very close to clipped. Its not but there is no room for the usual charcoal background sky.

Its a processing choice but there is also a bit of room left to lift the galaxy in this image. It holds up well to processing which shows how strong your signal is from all those hours and 20 inches of exposure. But that's your processing choices and to my mind neither right nor wrong but there is more left on the processing table should you wish to accentuate it more.

Do you think there is a gain from 30 minute subs? Some of the stars seem overexposed yet they are not super bright stars. But then you have gotten very deep. Would 10-15 minute exposures have worked better though? What's your take on that?

RBI on a focus star? Is that an Apogee issue? Are the focus stars too bright/saturated? I don't see RBI on my 16803 unless its something super bright like the lights on a passing low jet. Perhaps that is something adjustable like the gain?? (a driver improvement perhaps). As you say a large enough dither would do it but will that unsettle your autoguiding?

Anyway just my thoughts on an already excellent image.

I wonder if our Milky Way has an arm that swings up to the LMC like that?

Greg.

Thanks Greg for a very thoughtful reply. The green tinge to some of the background stars worried us. We recalibrated the monitor. Because I'm colourblind, I tend to go by the RGB values more than the look. Yes, some of those stars do have a green tinge. But if we made that go away, by any trick or twist we could think of, the core of the galaxy and many of the tiny background galaxies would start to look implausibly pink rather than orange.

Luckily with the mount sitting on 2.5 tonnes of steel reinforced concrete going down 1.8 metres into the ground, polar alignment says pretty steady year on year, and we don't have problems with guiding. Our home-grown software uses multiple guide stars - here say 20 of them - and two guide cameras, one free-standing taking 1 sec subs and one taking 10 sec subs through the main scope. Seems to work.

Your comment about the black point is an interesting one. We set the black point as accurately as possible, very close to, but not at, the point of clipping, rather than having a grey sky. No astronomical data are lost. Just personal preference.

The old STL-11000M didn't have the residual imaging problem. The Apogee certainly does, and has other problems besides, including little drippy smudges on the stars in long NB exposures, but it is a much better camera otherwise. Oh for the day when someone brings out something like a 16 megapixel CMOS astro-imaging chip with an affordable price-tag.

We'll get stuck into increasing the dithering.

Dimly aware that as well as the faint bridge between LMC and SMC, there is a faint tidal tail between LMC and us, but since it's coming straight at us, it's not for mortals to photograph.

Once again, thanks for your thoughtful comments, especially the effect of airglow on the color of objects low in the sky.

Originally Posted by Atmos

Having attempted this with a 5" one night, wow yours is deep! Lovely shot Mike and Trish

Thanks, Colin! Glad you like it.

Originally Posted by billdan

That's excellent M&T, so much detail, and heaps of background galaxies. A just reward for a great effort.

Cheers
Bill

Thanks, Bill. We tried combining with data from our two previous attempts, same scope but with an STL-11000M, and us on our L-plates. Tossed it all out.

Very best,
M & T