This image consists of 10 hours and 10 minutes of data capturing 4 hours and 30 minutes of luminance data and approximately 2 hours of red, green and blue data.
I have over 20 hours of data but after I stacked over 10 hours worth of luminance using Deep Sky Stacker I went through and eliminated the worst subs and then stacked my 4 hours and 30 minute and the stars were less bloated and the galaxy was sharper but maybe that is wrong or right I don't know.
From memory the fwhm as shown on deep sky stacker was between 5 and 8 I think. Not really happy with it but maybe there was some contribution of the seeing as opposed to my ability to stuff up the processing.
From memory the fwhm as shown on deep sky stacker was between 5 and 8 I think. Not really happy with it but maybe there was some contribution of the seeing as opposed to my ability to stuff up the processing.
5 & 8 is no good.
It's not worth doing 10 hours unless it's down to 3.5 FWHM or below
smooth as Mark but sounds like the seeing may have let you down a tad. never mind the colour data would still be useable when conditions fine up concentrate on the L.
Still looks pretty good Mark. As has been suggested, if you can get better seeing for your Lum it'll make all the difference
Also looks like you could push the saturation more but that is arguably a personal taste thing... I like bold
