5.75 hours of Eagle Nebula

[bloodhound31]

I have been gathering fifteen-minute subs of M16 for the past week, to add to the first lot I captured a week ago.

Here is a total of 5.75 hours

I tell ya, it is well worth the effort and a visible difference when you take the time to create darks and flats for subtraction, plus the extra subs. Really.

Baz.

[bluescope]

It's definitely improved Baz ... you have a lot of faint outlying nebulosity showing in this image.

[bloodhound31]

Thanks heaps Steve!

I can't wait to try a new target. I think I might go for the Omega Nebula.

[bluescope]

Originally Posted by bloodhound31

Thanks heaps Steve!

I can't wait to try a new target. I think I might go for the Omega Nebula.

Why not ... it's a close neighbour ... I look forward to your posting images of it mate !

[bloodhound31]

Why not indeed Steve?

In the meantime, it's stormy outside.

I tried it again in Deep Sky Stacker, then processed with Photoshop again and cropped it. Here's the crop.

[bluescope]

Looks good Baz !

[Craig_L]

Hi Baz,

Colour looks a lot better on the crop. Good work.

[Tamtarn]

Really getting into the heavy stuff now Baz 7.5hrs Wow !!

Great effort

[marc4darkskies (Marcus)]

The repro and crop is on the money there Baz. Colour balance much better - good detail. Nicely done.

Cheers, Marcus

[bloodhound31]

Thanks everyone!

Barb, I might have 7.5 hours if I get another clear night...

I am very impressed with the Black Diamond ED120 I can say.

[Tamtarn]

Whoops sorry Baz I'm getting ahead of you

Have to learn to read the posts properly

[Hagar (Doug)]

5.75 hrs Baz, that's dedication. Come up pretty good. Longer exposure certainly brings out a lot more of the faint stuff.

Nice one, keep at it Baz.

[bloodhound31]

Originally Posted by Tamtarn

Whoops sorry Baz I'm getting ahead of you

Have to learn to read the posts properly

Lol, no worries Barb. I don't know if I will get more on it yet, I am itching to move onto another target. I am curious as to how far I can or should go with it though......

Originally Posted by Hagar

5.75 hrs Baz, that's dedication. Come up pretty good. Longer exposure certainly brings out a lot more of the faint stuff.

Nice one, keep at it Baz.

Cheers Doug, I was spurred on by a personal desire to show this object for what it is, and to show those around me just what can be seen by an everyday amateur astronomer in his own front yard in the 'burbs.

Since I have started this hobby, I am amazed how many people actually want conversations with me to ask about some of the bigger questions... it's beautiful to watch and I am honored and a little humbled by the awesomness (Troy will like that) of the universe.

Baz.

[peeb61 (Paul)]

Nice one Baz...over 5 hours worth..phew! The difference is there.
Very nice indeed.

Paul

[gregbradley]

Well done Baz. Your certificate for long exposure astrophotography is in the mail - you've joined the 5 hours plus club!

Only problem now is there is no going back in future images hehehe.

Greg.

[bloodhound31]

Originally Posted by peeb61

Nice one Baz...over 5 hours worth..phew! The difference is there.
Very nice indeed.

Paul

Thanks Paul!

Originally Posted by gregbradley

Well done Baz. Your certificate for long exposure astrophotography is in the mail - you've joined the 5 hours plus club!

Only problem now is there is no going back in future images hehehe.

Greg.

Greg, that thought had occurred to me...groan...I really like sleep too...but you're right. Why would I waste my time on shorter exposures when I have seen what can be done with longer ones?

Baz.

[Ric]

Wonderful image Baz, the outer nebulosity is awesome.

Great work

[JD2439975 (Justin)]

I think it was strongmanmike that said recently that the best advice he could give was to get more exposure time...I think you're proving his point.

Looking real nice Barry.

[multiweb (Marc)]

Very nice. The extra data pays off.