NGC6992 Veil Nebula in Colour Mapped Narrow Band

Bassnut (Fred) · #1 19-06-2008, 10:35 PM

Ha:SII:Ha:OIII 100:40:100:40 mins Ha bin1 10 min subs SII:OIII bin2, 5 min subs.

http://fredsastro.googlepages.com/home

Taken on GRAS G5. Tak Epsilon 250 10" OTA at f3.4, PME and ST10XME (cropped) under a full moon and stray cloud.

Somewhat noisy, processed under the influence of Southern Comfort (how much more fun can you have sitting down

).

The usual overprocessing, could have done with a heap more data, but you go with what you can get within weather retrictions

.

Tommorrow morning I will see a thousand faults and feel sorry for the way it looks

.

Bassnut (Fred) · #2 19-06-2008, 10:46 PM

I must say, its nice to know I can cream the kind of crappy 42hr effort you might see from the likes of Neil Flemming

http://www.flemingastrophotography.c...Ha2_100pct.jpg

renormalised (Carl) · #3 19-06-2008, 11:41 PM

I thought I could see the "spectral signature" of ethanol in your piccie

strongmanmike (Michael) · #4 20-06-2008, 12:40 AM

Quite nice... for a super short exposure!

and not even as over processed as my "enhanced" CG4

MIke

Bassnut (Fred) · #5 20-06-2008, 11:13 AM

Thanks Guys. Theres ethanol in SC ??, eek, does that mean I can go faster , or more efficiently or something

.

Yes, theres not a lot of exposure time there, and this morning it looked bad, so I tweaked it up a bit.

Ric · #6 20-06-2008, 12:32 PM

MMMM narrowband, well done Fred I really enjoyed this one.

The full image looks great with the detail of the nebula and nice round stars as well. The blue sets it very nicely as well.

cheers

renormalised (Carl) · #7 21-06-2008, 09:54 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bassnut

Thanks Guys. Theres ethanol in SC ??, eek, does that mean I can go faster , or more efficiently or something

.

You'll get more miles to the gallon, Fred

jase (Jason) · #8 21-06-2008, 02:07 PM

Ah, the joys of NB processing under the influence of alcohol... you can't stuff up the colour balance as there isn't any.

Good work Fred.

skeltz (Rob) · #9 21-06-2008, 03:36 PM

Ah yes i think this nebula suits narrowband well,good job

Did you say you were on southern comfort and the grass?

Bassnut (Fred) · #10 21-06-2008, 04:08 PM

Ah, no Rob, (sheesh) that never did the trick for me (just as well, trust me , imagine the processing whilst on that too

).

Yep Jase, colour balance just gets in the way of art, although I now think its a bit messy, I should have gone with only Ha and OIII, that seems to be popular (and cleaner) on this in NB.

Bassnut (Fred) · #11 21-06-2008, 04:10 PM

Ric, I may have overdone the blue, but yes it does look nice, the subs were all totally different on this, there is good seperation between Ha and OIII.

Robert_T · #12 22-06-2008, 06:58 AM

Wow Fred, this narrowband imaging produces amazing results.

The veil here looks to me like the complex tangle of sea foam looking down along a cosmic beach

gregbradley · #13 22-06-2008, 09:09 PM

Wonderful image Fred.

I don't know what you are referring to on overprocessed as I think it looks great.

Very electric, very high impact image.

Greg.

seeker372011 (Narayan) · #14 22-06-2008, 09:37 PM

but why colour mapped narrow band in the first place?

I blame the Hubble space telescope for this disease.

a perfectly sensational image but now it has to be in weird colours

Bassnut (Fred) · #15 23-06-2008, 03:13 PM

Thanks Rob, yes this object in particular shows gas machinatons in great detail, makes you wonder what forces cause this effect and not just all merge together in a diffuse mess.

Greg, the colours are pushed, which give the electric effect. As you well know, many would see this as overprocessing rather than art

Narayan, Im not sure if your haveing a go or asking

. Anyway, there are many reasons for NB (other than just being different and arty). The biggest one for me is imaging during full moon and urban light pollution (not affected by them).

seeker372011 (Narayan) · #16 23-06-2008, 06:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bassnut

T
Narayan, Im not sure if your haveing a go or asking

. Anyway, there are many reasons for NB (other than just being different and arty). The biggest one for me is imaging during full moon and urban light pollution (not affected by them).

yes couldnt agree more..was just joshing

hate having to carry stuff miles to a dark site and then getting only a an hour or so before having to pack up again

gregbradley · #17 23-06-2008, 06:16 PM

Neil's image is wonderful but I like the nebula part of this Mike Chapa TEC160mm fluorite triplet image better. Despite smaller aperture (TMB203mm ED versus TEC 160mm fluorite). Neil's star colours are better but perhaps the fluorite triplet is showing its class here. I hear there is no difference between ED glass and fluorite but I don't believe it.

There are differences - mainly in subtle hues etc that don't necessarly show up in the hard numbers of normal tests.

Greg
refractor snob.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bassnut

I must say, its nice to know I can cream the kind of crappy 42hr effort you might see from the likes of Neil Flemming

http://www.flemingastrophotography.c...Ha2_100pct.jpg

Bassnut (Fred) · #18 23-06-2008, 06:21 PM

Greg, umm, image?

gregbradley · #19 23-06-2008, 07:33 PM

LOL.

Oops.. http://www.chapaccd.com/deepsky/n6960.html

Greg.

Bassnut (Fred) · #20 23-06-2008, 07:46 PM

wow, and only 90min each Ha and O111, it compares well with neils pic at 42hrs. impressive, is the diff down to a refractor you think?. Although neils pic is sharp right down to pixel level. Makes you wonder how far you can go, this kind of detail is similar to terrestial quality, after that, the only way to increase res is more pixels in the cam.

Im convinced, ill reprocess in only Ha/OIII, it seems the go for this object, looks much better.