Here's a quick and dirty M104 I did last weekend. This is 25x1min using the DSI II/10"newt combination. I stopped at 25 subs because I thought there was no detail being captured based on the on-screen image but decided to process tonight just for fun.
Very nice quick image with a lot of detail in the dust lanes Peter. I like the image scale as well with 104 being so small.
I would have rotated the image 180 degress just for asthetics but nevertheless upside down and back to front is what you get with Newts for the purists.
Also would have done a slight USM ( .5 or .6 pixels @ 100% 0 threshhold ) it brings out those dust lanes even better without adding too much noise even on this small image.
Thanks for all the comments. Here's another version with the USM treatment and rotated 180 deg.
Steve,
In terms of processing I normalised then stacked using Neb in drizzle mode (which increased image scale by 1.5x). Then to PS for levels and curves (5 iterations), touched up a couple of blemishes using clone stamp, removed a bit of a gradient, noise treatment and finally ME deconvolution. I then reduced the image scale to original This version has the additional USM and rotation.
Well there is certainly some detail in there Peter so don't trust your individual unproscessed subs ever again huh??? The detail in there is getting pretty close to Peter Wards David Malin award winning version actually..well at least the level of detail in the image size he has displayed on his web site anyway.. .
Thanks Mike and Kev. I'm in the middle of taking darks for a 4 minute attempt tonight. It will be interesting to see if fewer longer exposures brings out the same detail.
Thanks for all the comments. Here's another version with the USM treatment and rotated 180 deg.
Steve,
In terms of processing I normalised then stacked using Neb in drizzle mode (which increased image scale by 1.5x). Then to PS for levels and curves (5 iterations), touched up a couple of blemishes using clone stamp, removed a bit of a gradient, noise treatment and finally ME deconvolution. I then reduced the image scale to original This version has the additional USM and rotation.
Peter
I hope you didn't feel you had to do the things I suggested Peter ... but having done them I hope you like the result mate !
Thanks for the run down on your processing routine.
Thanks Ric, Jen, Steve and Andrew. I had another go at it last night and although the seeing wasn't as good as last weekend, I managed to snap another 32 subs at 2 mins each this time. I did try for some 4 min subs but the clouds rolled in. The extra exposure made the skyglow a bit overwhelming so I've layered the new data in with the original image.
Thanks Ric, Jen, Steve and Andrew. I had another go at it last night and although the seeing wasn't as good as last weekend, I managed to snap another 32 subs at 2 mins each this time. I did try for some 4 min subs but the clouds rolled in. The extra exposure made the skyglow a bit overwhelming so I've layered the new data in with the original image.
Comments welcome.
If you upload the original in the same post we will be able to do slideshow type comparison to see any change between the two images
Sorry Peter ... I didn't explain clearly what I meant there.
I meant for you to post the two images together like this for comparison purposes.
You can see from this that the second image has a definite improvement in overall brightness of the galaxy and shows the extent of the dust lanes better in the glow.
The detail in there is getting pretty close to Peter Wards David Malin award winning version actually..well at least the level of detail in the image size he has displayed on his web site anyway.. 
.
quick and dirty wow i cant wait for some good stuff cheers 
