This was a hard one, very very dim and hard to pull the detail up without the noise.
Details: Camera: QHY10 OSC Scope: Takahashi TSA120 at f7.5 Image Sub frames: 18 X 15 minute subs fully calibrated
and shot over 2 nights. Software Used: Images Plus, Photoshop. Total exposure time: 4.5 hours Image library size including Calibration files: 2.35 GB
Even at this I think I need as much data again to lift the signal and squash the noise level.
An interesting test for the camera. I am quite happy with it so far.
Nice work Doug.
I'm curious to know what that line is across the middle of the image?
Hi JJJ. Just a satalite trail smack bang through the middle. I didn't notice it when I captured it all but will get rid of it with the next lot of data that I get and add to it.
Thanks Marty, yes quite a bit more data required and a little better processing should make a difference.
Not bad Doug. NGC 300 is quite a tough one to do well as it has a pretty low surface brightness but you are certainly off to a good start with this data.
Hi Gray, Thanks Mate, No I haven't sold the 9 and don't intend to. I bought the 10 so I have a OSC with reasonable resolving power which will allow me an image during the shorter summer nights. Work is a problem making imaging time short. I will continue to use both.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alchemy
Very similar to 6744, it takes a ridiculous amount of data to get much from it, even then it tends to be monochromatic.
Tough work, but we like a challenge , don't we.
Thanks Clive but it does give me something to work on.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stevec35
Not bad Doug. NGC 300 is quite a tough one to do well as it has a pretty low surface brightness but you are certainly off to a good start with this data.
Cheers
Steve
Thanks Steve, Low surface brightness is an understatement. I can usually see my targets with a 30 sec exposure to frame it but this one was just visible at 30 sec and then only at 2X2.
Quote:
Originally Posted by RickS
Was that taken under dark skies, Doug?
Hi Rick. Reasonably dark from my backyard.
Quote:
Originally Posted by strongmanmike
Great result Doug, the noise doesn't bother me really, it has a nice deep galactic look to it with a nice bright glow
Mike
Thanks Mike, still a way to go with this one just short on time and weather.
Quote:
Originally Posted by h0ughy
thats because we are photon starved Mike.
great to see how that camera works - did you capture under images plus?
i see you have two different gradients in the image - one green and one red
Thanks David, The gradients are something I am yet to get to the bottom of. Seems to be something to do with the way these sony chips are read into the computer. Interesting but still a bit to work out.
A good image. There is still a lot of processing left to be done on it though.
Gradient correction mainly and then it cleans up nicely. I did a play with it and it came up very nice.
Try Gradient Xterminator on it and then boost the stars colours and overall saturation and then background only noise control.
Its better than what you may think.
Greg.
Thanks Greg, This is just a quick stretch to see where it is going and hopefully a couple more hours of data will add just that bit more to it all.
Quote:
Originally Posted by RickS
Hey Doug, PixInsight has some nice (poorly documented ) tools for sorting out gradients. DBE works very well!
Cheers,
Rick.
Thanks Rick, When will you be available to do either a Skype run through or a telephone hook up to guide me through this rather trying undocumented, expensive bit of software.
Given my previous example of this object, I'd be rapt with what you've got so far. It will end up a very nice image mate! Glad it's all coming together and you can actually see the sky!
Thanks Rick, When will you be available to do either a Skype run through or a telephone hook up to guide me through this rather trying undocumented, expensive bit of software.
I am doing NGC300 at the moment with the ED80 and man it is a faint sucker even with 10Min luminance.
See what i can suck out of it with the QHY9.
Hopefully my GSO RC8 will arrive tomorrow
Plenty more data needed, but already looking like a good start to what I hope will be a great image. Certainly a fair bit of noise present, but given the stretching I am not surprised.
Personally I would have gone with longer subs. Narrow aperture really needs long subs in my opinion. It is most likely an issue in your town with light pollution but on those really faint objects with low surface brightness the extra time in a sub works a treat.
Just out of interest is this a crop? It looks to be the case with the star sizes.
Did you sell the QHY9?
) tools for sorting out gradients. DBE works very well!
