In our recent 17 hour SHO lagoon, the Hourglass was slightly burned out. Last night, waiting for our main target to come up, we did 3 x 10 min subs in each channel, and processed to show maximum detail in the tiny hourglass.
Processing: Median combine, zero point to foothill of histogram, rough colour balance, separate into stars and starless background, working starless make background colour neutral, wavelet sharpen, add back H-alpha stars as white. All in GoodLook 64 .
Here is a tight crop (0.55 sec arc/pixel) around the Hourglass.
In our recent 17 hour SHO lagoon, the Hourglass was slightly burned out. Last night, waiting for our main target to come up, we did 3 x 10 min subs in each channel, and processed to show maximum detail in the tiny hourglass.
Processing: Median combine, zero point to foothill of histogram, rough colour balance, separate into stars and starless background, working starless make background colour neutral, wavelet sharpen, add back H-alpha stars as white. All in GoodLook 64 .
Here is a tight crop (0.55 sec arc/pixel) around the Hourglass.
Weeeelll...not bad...I would be keen to see even more detail from a1/2 metre mirror ..Hmmm? Any chance you might try a comercial image processing package..??
Thank Greg. At least as Colin said, it's not all white.
Quote:
Originally Posted by strongmanmike
Weeeelll...not bad...I would be keen to see even more detail from a1/2 metre mirror ..Hmmm? Any chance you might try a comercial image processing package..??
Mike
Hi, Mike. You are right that it could be yet better. Love to blame it on the processing, but ordinary seeing (4.2 pixels or 2.3 sec arc FWHM), inexpert collimation, and only 3 subs are probably also in there. We checked the collimation and the secondary tilt is right, but we probably need to do something about the primary-to-secondary spacing. The best thing would be to pick a better night.
Your ultra-close-up, and Rick Stevenson's shot, both show more detail. I was impressed by your observation that the little star just next to the hourglass is actually a double. I thought I saw it as a double very clearly at one point during processing the H-alpha, and thought that it was an artifact. On further examination, I think what I was seeing was a tiny patch of nebulosity between the star and the hourglass. So something different to what you saw.
Here is a rather over-roasted, wormy, attempt to wring out the very last drops to see what might be there in the H-alpha.
Anyone know of other good non-burned-out amateur hourglasses?
Really nice to see an hourglass not to burnt out some nice detail in there given the scale. Seeing is a real drag of late averaging 3.5 to 4.5 at my place near newcastle.
Good shot - close up and personal for sure!
Cheers,
Tim
Quote:
Originally Posted by Flugel88
Really nice to see an hourglass not to burnt out some nice detail in there given the scale. Seeing is a real drag of late averaging 3.5 to 4.5 at my place near newcastle.
Thanks muchly Tim and Michael.
Had a go at combining this version (with Hourglass not burned out) with the 17 hour deep version that shows faint outer features. Just can't be done. Hourglass, outer features, overall relationship: pick any two.