Radio 2

[Peter Ward]

New!

Improved! (well sort 'o )



The link is here

Feedback most welcome !

[h0ughy (David)]

all those "tiny" galaxies - awesome

[gregbradley]

Yeah that looks very good. Got the jet, showing some shell structures there and the extent of the halo and the dust is showing nicely. Terrific central sharpness and detail without an overprocessed look.

Greg.

[alpal]

Great work Peter,
I'm amazed that you can get such sharpness & the halo from Sydney!
off topic:
I just bought a house with a nice backyard & no trees -
& hope to set up an observatory dome within the next year.
I think that's the way to go.
I can't be bothered setting up my scope just for one night when usually the clouds
come rolling over anyway.
It's imagers with domes like you that seem to get the best & most data.

cheers
Allan

[Peter Ward]

Originally Posted by gregbradley

Yeah that looks very good. Got the jet, showing some shell structures there and the extent of the halo and the dust is showing nicely. Terrific central sharpness and detail without an overprocessed look.

Greg.

Thanks Greg...I'm pretty happy with the result to date...a bit more exposure time is always good, hence I can't be sure I won't add to the data set a tad more

Originally Posted by h0ughy

all those "tiny" galaxies - awesome

But, but..what about the Big Mac in the middle???

Originally Posted by alpal

Great work Peter,
I'm amazed that you can get such sharpness & the halo from Sydney!
off topic:
I just bought a house with a nice backyard & no trees -
& hope to set up an observatory dome within the next year.
I think that's the way to go.
I can't be bothered setting up my scope just for one night when usually the clouds
come rolling over anyway.
It's imagers with domes like you that seem to get the best & most data.

cheers
Allan

I purchased my Sirius Dome around 25 years ago.

I wish I had done it a decade earlier.

A dome will give you immediate sky access without the hassle or wear and tear on
what can be expensive kit by having to move/unpack/assemble/disassemble/etc.

You can nail the mount's polar alignment then forget about it.

They protect your telescope(s) from wind buffeting and stray light (e.g. my neighbours mini-sun floodlight)

While not inexpensive (a fully robotic 2.3m is currently around $16k).if I now divide the cost of my fancy hobby-shed by 25, the cost per year is peanuts.
.....in my case about $280 a year (well, I did buy it 25 years ago!)

Yes...I highly recommend getting one


As for deep-sky imaging from the "burbs", once again this is proof positive it can be done. If you run narrow band, you could set-up in Pitt street with a full moon, and no-one would be the wiser.

I gave a talk at Sydney Observatory on this very subject last year. It's all about maximising signal while reducing the noise.

Sure, I'd like to run my scope with excellent seeing in the high Chilean desert...but swapping out a filter set would be a a bit of a bugger

[alpal]

Originally Posted by Peter Ward

I purchased my Sirius Dome around 25 years ago.

I wish I had done it a decade earlier.

A dome will give you immediate sky access without the hassle or wear and tear on
what can be expensive kit by having to move/unpack/assemble/disassemble/etc.

You can nail the mount's polar alignment then forget about it.

They protect your telescope(s) from wind buffeting and stray light (e.g. my neighbours mini-sun floodlight)

While not inexpensive (a fully robotic 2.3m is currently around $16k).if I now divide the cost of my fancy hobby-shed by 25, the cost per year is peanuts.
.....in my case about $280 a year (well, I did buy it 25 years ago!)

Yes...I highly recommend getting one


As for deep-sky imaging from the "burbs", once again this is proof positive it can be done. If you run narrow band, you could set-up in Pitt street with a full moon, and no-one would be the wiser.

I gave a talk at Sydney Observatory on this very subject last year. It's all about maximising signal while reducing the noise.

Sure, I'd like to run my scope with excellent seeing in the high Chilean desert...but swapping out a filter set would be a a bit of a bugger

Thanks Peter for the advice.
It will take me a while to paint & fix up my old place after I move out to the new place.
I then have to sell the old place - what a hassle.
It all takes time & money.

I may not go fully robotic to start off - I need to check all that out.
I need to see if they use encoders to keep the window aligned in front of the telescope
or if there's an easier way.
I may be able to jerry rig something up with a cheaper dome.
It's on the to do list!
Also a Newt. is a bit harder to organise for robotic use than an RC or a refractor.

cheers
Allan

[Atmos (Colin)]

It has come up really nicely Peter, nice being able to see what's left of that SN as well. Not sure how well my little pin straw would do in resolving that these days, not that it has become reasonably dim

Loving the detail in the dust lanes

[Peter Ward]

Originally Posted by Atmos

It has come up really nicely Peter, nice being able to see what's left of that SN as well. Not sure how well my little pin straw would do in resolving that these days, not that it has become reasonably dim

Loving the detail in the dust lanes

Thanks...the Supernova is fading fast and is remarkably red at this point.
The was virtually zero signal in the blue and green channels.

For those interested I don't use the usual UV/IR cut filter with the Alluna for my luminance channel data.

Even with the field corrector in place, the I/R focus is perfect, so I use a plain clear filter to catch those extra I/R photons

[gregbradley]

Interesting. I have a clear luminance filter and used it on my TEC180. It tended to make stars bloat a bit. Obviously best used on a mirrored scope.
Nice one.

Greg.

[Paul Haese]

Nice detail Peter, a slightly bigger resolution would be interesting to view I suspect. The background is a little blue though.

[astroron (Ron)]

Originally Posted by Peter Ward

New!

Improved! (well sort 'o )



The link is here

Feedback most welcome !

Wonderful image in the high res version.
The supernova 2016 adj is lovely and red.
Thanks for sharing Peter.
Cheers

[Tony_ (Tony)]

Brilliant image - detail in dust lanes is amazing.

Tony.

[marc4darkskies (Marcus)]

Yep, I like this version Peter. Enlarging to approximately the correct image scale suggests seeing was below par though.

Cheers, Marcus

[Peter Ward]

Originally Posted by marc4darkskies

Yep, I like this version Peter. Enlarging to approximately the correct image scale suggests seeing was below par though.

Cheers, Marcus

Well....you know I don't do "big" on the net
Ah..and, yes, the seeing. OK, but not great.

I'm getting less picky about the seeing these days....something less than torrential rain isn't so bad.

Originally Posted by Tony_

Brilliant image - detail in dust lanes is amazing.

Tony.

Thanks Tony.

Originally Posted by astroron

Wonderful image in the high res version.
The supernova 2016 adj is lovely and red.
Thanks for sharing Peter.
Cheers

Ta. That S/N is indeed *very* red.

Originally Posted by Paul Haese

Nice detail Peter, a slightly bigger resolution would be interesting to view I suspect. The background is a little blue though.

Thanks Paul...yes the background is slightly green on one of my screens, blue on the other and perfect on my i-pad....

[multiweb (Marc)]

Sub zero cool for such short integration time.

Originally Posted by Peter Ward

As for deep-sky imaging from the "burbs", once again this is proof positive it can be done. If you run narrow band, you could set-up in Pitt street with a full moon, and no-one would be the wiser.
I gave a talk at Sydney Observatory on this very subject last year. It's all about maximising signal while reducing the noise.

With top optics and zero scattering, yes, it's a no brainer. Otherwise, meh...