NGC 253 redone

[sjastro]

It's a case of "continuous improvement".

I always thought there was more to be extracted from the raw data so here it is.

http://users.westconnect.com.au/~sjastro/ngc253c.html

90m L , 50m R, 50m G, 50m B BRC-250, ST-10XME.

Clear skies

Steven

[Tilt (Michael)]

Nice, very nice

Michael

[jjjnettie (Jeanette)]

Such crisp clean detail is extraordinary.
This one is going straight on my desktop. Thanks.

[Octane (Humayun)]

Steven,

This image looks like it's a blend between a watercolour landscape and a digital image.

Some of the stars look a bit funny, like they're casting shadows. Is it a mismatch between channel alignments?

All in all, I like it; quite unique.

Regards,
Humayun

[jjjnettie (Jeanette)]

I think it's just artefacts from sharpening.
Loreal would clean them up.

[TrevorW]

Not bad Steve

[allan gould]

Originally Posted by Octane

Steven,

This image looks like it's a blend between a watercolour landscape and a digital image.

Some of the stars look a bit funny, like they're casting shadows. Is it a mismatch between channel alignments?

All in all, I like it; quite unique.

Regards,
Humayun

Sorry, It comes up the same on my screen and what detail there is is overshadowed by large blurred regions within the galaxy. I think some of the regions have been over-sharpened and some not. I also think the total image scale is too large for the data.
But maybe a better processing would do justice to the data you have collected.

[sjastro]

Originally Posted by Tilt

Nice, very nice

Michael

Thanks Michael.

Originally Posted by jjjnettie

Such crisp clean detail is extraordinary.
This one is going straight on my desktop. Thanks.

Thanks Jeanette for placing my image on your desktop.

Originally Posted by Octane

Steven,

This image looks like it's a blend between a watercolour landscape and a digital image.

Some of the stars look a bit funny, like they're casting shadows. Is it a mismatch between channel alignments?

All in all, I like it; quite unique.

Regards,
Humayun

Hello Humayun. Due to flexure in the camera/ optical set up I have left the stars out of the sharpening process otherwise the stars would have a decidedly stranger shape. Maybe that is what you are observing.

Originally Posted by TrevorW

Not bad Steve

Thanks for your feedback Trevor.

Originally Posted by allan gould

Sorry, It comes up the same on my screen and what detail there is is overshadowed by large blurred regions within the galaxy. I think some of the regions have been over-sharpened and some not. I also think the total image scale is too large for the data.
But maybe a better processing would do justice to the data you have collected.

Regions of the galaxy have not been selectively sharpened or blurred. The higher contrast central regions are more responsive to sharpening compared to the lower contrast areas in the arms.

I have never heard of image scale being too large for data unless you are trying to hide flaws in the image. Image detail is a function of the scale. I'm not prepared to sacrifice detail by going to a lower resolution.

Steven

[bloodhound31]

I think you have done a spectacular job.

What was the scope? No way I could get this with my ED120.

Baz.

[sjastro]

Originally Posted by bloodhound31

I think you have done a spectacular job.

What was the scope? No way I could get this with my ED120.

Baz.

Thanks Barry.

It was taken with a 10" Baker-RC.

Interesting the polarized opinions given in this thread.

Clear skies

Steven