This is nearly an HaRGB but does have a bity of Lum blended in. I wanted to accentuate the expanding gas tenrils a bit more and give them a bit more body.
its nice to keep the hand in doing something - if for no other reason than to remember how to do something. I like what you have come back with Mike - quite nice! One day you must show me the ins and outs of Astroart
Really nice Mike. I know how faint these tendrils are. Below is a stack of 20 min exposures at 1600 ISO with the canon 5DH and Canon 300mm F2.8 at f/2.8 with an Astronomik 13nm HA filter. It is because of the obvious noise that I decided to build my fridge. I hope to do a mosaic in colour (for stars) and HA and O3 (for tendrils) of this region. I have also put your image on mine with Registar to show how vast this SNR is. My images show 7.0 x 4.7 degrees.
Again an image that really shows this faint region beautifully. Well worth any number of repro's.
I would have posted earlier but I had to hunt down this image from my archives.
its nice to keep the hand in doing something - if for no other reason than to remember how to do something. I like what you have come back with Mike - quite nice! One day you must show me the ins and outs of Astroart
On ya Dave, I usually need a few tries before I am happy..you guys are just unlucky enough to have to endure the journey with me
Astroart is the only camera control, image calibration, pre processing and frame aligning software I have ever used since first using a CCD in mid 2003 (amazing huh?) I am currently using Astroart4. I have found it a very successful program
Quote:
Originally Posted by avandonk
Really nice Mike. I know how faint these tendrils are. Below is a stack of 20 min exposures at 1600 ISO with the canon 5DH and Canon 300mm F2.8 at f/2.8 with an Astronomik 13nm HA filter. It is because of the obvious noise that I decided to build my fridge. I hope to do a mosaic in colour (for stars) and HA and O3 (for tendrils) of this region. I have also put your image on mine with Registar to show how vast this SNR is. My images show 7.0 x 4.7 degrees.
Again an image that really shows this faint region beautifully. Well worth any number of repro's.
I would have posted earlier but I had to hunt down this image from my archives.
Bert
Great stuff Bert. I was aware that the main SNR was pretty huge not to mention the huge mass of other nebulosity in that area of sky. I look forward to your efforts. Gendler has of course trumped pretty much everyone with his million frame mozaic of the region at long FL, truly masterful work... sheesh and he doesn't even live down here, MAN!
Quote:
Originally Posted by multiweb
Great pic. High-res is amazing.
Thanks Marc, the seeing that night was only average but much better than my last trip to Wiruna though the optics and laser guided like autoguiding from the Tak NJP mount and Astroart4 do help here too of course
Well, I do like your repro better.
Little more neutrality to the background, through the wisps that is. Not as blue.
But I know you lean a bit on the blue side which is fine by me.
The 1500x1000 full page view fits just perfect on my 24" monitor, with a little space to spare.
Great just gazing at it.
There's even a tiny little galaxy to the bottom L/H corner.
Hope you can get away to a dark site soon... well after this moons starts to wane any way.
Not sure how me repros we can handle
They all look great big Mike ! too hard to chose a favorite .
I like the close-ups of the wisps, they are so interesting and intricate
Quote:
Originally Posted by richardo
Hey Mike,
you just had to do it didn't you.
Well, I do like your repro better.
Little more neutrality to the background, through the wisps that is. Not as blue.
But I know you lean a bit on the blue side which is fine by me.
The 1500x1000 full page view fits just perfect on my 24" monitor, with a little space to spare.
Great just gazing at it.
There's even a tiny little galaxy to the bottom L/H corner.
Hope you can get away to a dark site soon... well after this moons starts to wane any way.
Not sure how me repros we can handle
All the best
Rich
Actually the big file should look good on your 24"er too..? I only have a 22" , they say the extra 2" isn't really necessary....but you must have big feet too then?
Actually the big file should look good on your 24"er too..? I only have a 22" , they say the extra 2" isn't really necessary....but you must have big feet too then?
Can't find that galaxy though...?
Mike[/quote]
I actually went for the dell because they are a true 8bit instead of most of the 22"er being 6bit with 2bit dithering. Plus the 3 year dead pixel warranty was pretty hard to ignore.
Yep you're right, I checked out the 2500x1700 version and the galaxy I thought that was, from the smaller version, is actually a line of redish/ mottled stars.
BTW at this size, pretty amazing I must say.
I actually went for the dell because they are a true 8bit instead of most of the 22"er being 6bit with 2bit dithering. Plus the 3 year dead pixel warranty was pretty hard to ignore.
I was making a joke, "extra inches"...??? ...sorry
Quote:
Yep you're right, I checked out the 2500x1700 version and the galaxy I thought that was, from the smaller version, is actually a line of redish/ mottled stars.
Hmmm?...me thinks ya might need glasses it is clearly 4 stars of different colours even in the 1500 X 1000 shot to me...?
Quote:
BTW at this size, pretty amazing I must say.
Yes, only 1/4 of the number of viewers for the 2500 X 1700 version compared to the 1500 X 1000 version, ah well their loss
I was making a joke, "extra inches"...??? ...sorry
Hmmm?...me thinks ya might need glasses it is clearly 4 stars of different colours even in the 1500 X 1000 shot to me...?
Yes, only 1/4 of the number of viewers for the 2500 X 1700 version compared to the 1500 X 1000 version, ah well their loss
Hang in there, you'll get one
Aaaaahhhhaaa, not real quick on the uptake Mike, need to see a face to put some subtle jokes together .. god I'm thick at times
Yes, I actually sometimes need to wear glasses.... from spending too much time staring at a monitor
To me in the smaller version it did look like a little galaxy.... true jeeeezzz, I'm cracking up.. things are getting saggy and baggy and wearing out
Craig: re the star colours...magic ?? no seriosuly, I do a pretty basic LRGB combine process using Astroart4 then up the saturation in Astroart and again in PS at some stage in later processing.
CCD's do tend to show better star colour saturation compared to DSLR's I beleive?
Got a technical question for you. When you do your LRGB combine do you normalise the RGB or the LRGB first?
I have been finding using CCDstack and Baader and to a lesser degree the Astronomik filters that unless I do a normalise I can get weird colours.
With the Baader it is more pronounced and I have lost some images due to weird colour combines. Today I was processing the Vela SNR and I kept getting weird electric blue colours until I normalised not only RGB but the full LRGB then the colours were fine.
Its enough to make me go back to Astrodon filters and risk the reflections problem.
Got a technical question for you. When you do your LRGB combine do you normalise the RGB or the LRGB first?
No, I do everything by eye really.
I do the RGB and LRGB combine in Astroart4 and I think in a pretty basic way. After preparing the aligned R, G & B frames (usually DDP and log stretch) matching them purely by eye I just use the RGB command to get the RGB then usually blur and up the saturation a bit. I then open the Lum and do the LRGB with a single click - pretty simple.
but...I JUST CAN'T HELP MYSEF 
the optics and laser guided like autoguiding from the Tak NJP mount and Astroart4 do help here too of course 
jeeeezzz, I'm cracking up.. things are getting saggy and baggy and wearing out
