Orion neb with DSLR. Tips?

[mg (Mitchell)]

Hi everyone. Sorry to bore you with M42!

Have been playing with my new mount and getting better at polar alignment.
I set up my mount in the evening, then went to bed till the moon set and pleiades (my intended target) rose. I got up at about 1:30, and a thin tree was blocking right where pleaides was so I went after M42, which I'd never tried before.
I think it's a good target for a newbie because it's bright and there's also plenty of images out there for comparison.

This shot was taken with 45 second subs, unguided. I took 100, kept and stacked about 65 or 70 in DSS.
Camera is an unmodded canon 600D.

I think I underexposed my subs, because the blue channel was clipped pretty badly down the black end.

I'd love feedback on how I can improve things. I see plenty of breathtaking images on IIS, and many are taken with higher end equipment. Would be great to know how I can improve things without comparing my efforts to images taken with narrowband / $15k scopes / $10k CCDs.
There's soooo much in these objects that I can't get (yet), but I really enjoy squeezing everything I can out of my equipment.

Here's a link to bigger image:
http://i1068.photobucket.com/albums/...ps79407c16.jpg

[nebulosity. (Jo)]

That is a VERY nice image, I can't really give you any advice as I'm just a newbie too.

One thing I have found is that you don't need flash equipment to get nice images, most of my stuff is home built

Cheers
Jo

PS Is it alright if I have a fiddle with your image? Not that I know what I'm doing or anything, it just looks like it has a lot of potential.

[mg (Mitchell)]

Originally Posted by nebulosity.

PS Is it alright if I have a fiddle with your image? Not that I know what I'm doing or anything, it just looks like it has a lot of potential.

Yeah that's cool. Go for it!

[nebulosity. (Jo)]

What'd ya reckon?

Just did a bit of a stretch and had a bit of a play with the colour levels, I probably cooked it a bit much, Oh well.

Jo

[rogerco (Roger)]

There is no such thing as being bored with M42, especially not a lovely photo like this, I too have the 600D and would be proud of this as an early effort. Looking at you high res version in the black background there looks like there are some artifacts, maybe too much sharpening? I am only just starting to get anywhere with processing so I will leave it to others to guide you. But great photo, my favorite object.

You don't by the way say what your other equipment is.

[Tony_ (Tony)]

Hello Mitchell,

Great image. It's not easy to match the superb images with an unmodded dslr - that's also what I use. However, it is possible to get very good results - and your equipment seems quite capable of this.
Your image can be improved with a bit more processing, but to get a really good image of m42 - you need longer subs if possible - say 2 minutes. (also more overall time).
This will overexpose the core so you also need to take shorter subs - maybe down to 10 seconds and also 20 seconds. You will need to experiment with this. You then use these shorter exposures to make a composite image using masks in photoshop.
There is a tutorial on youtube that shows how to do this - it is quite detailed.
I don't know if this is the only way to do it - but it is the only way I know to get the detail from the fainter areas and controlling the over-exposed core. I've only used this technique once - it takes a bit of time.

Regards,
Tony.

[cometcatcher (Kevin)]

You're on the right track. The only way to get more out of it is more subs which allows you to stretch the data more.

I'm just about to post an M42 of my own.

[mg (Mitchell)]

Thanks for the feedback everyone.

Originally Posted by rogerco

You don't by the way say what your other equipment is.

My mount is an AZ EQ6, and scope is a 102mm f6 ED doublet. I can get 45sec to 1min subs with round stars without guiding, which may improve with more meticulous polar alignment. Haven't tried the pe correction feature yet which might help too.

Originally Posted by nebulosity.

What'd ya reckon?

Just did a bit of a stretch and had a bit of a play with the colour levels, I probably cooked it a bit much, Oh well.

Jo

I think you've managed to get the outer parts of the neb to show better but traded off a bit elsewhere. I watched a video of someone using masks in Photoshop in concentric circles out from the core to get the exposure right. Maybe that's the one you are talking about Tony?
That should give me something to do with the full moon out - not to mention bucketing rain.

[multiweb (Marc)]

Hi Mitchell, that's a really nice shot. You just need to watch your color balance and you've also clipped your picture in the blacks. But all the details are there. Nice one.

[rcheshire (Rowland)]

I agree with Marc. The background is lighter around M42, composed of dust clouds. You can afford to brighten it up. Still, very nicely done.

[Tony_ (Tony)]

This is a link to the video:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=THlwDf4zDDo

When taking long subs of some DSOs the brighter area (eg. the core of M42) gets overexposed - possibly saturated, which removes all the detail.
One way to correct this is to take another image with much shorter subs - specifically to capture the detail of the brighter areas. You then use masks in photoshop to create a composite image using the longer exposed fainter details and the shorter exposures of the bright regions. You stack both sets of exposures separately (eg. in DSS) then use photoshop to combine the two (or more) images.
It takes time - but the great images you see don't just happen, there is a lot of processing time in some of those shots. Too much effort for me - for now I'm happy with short exposures and quick processing, but I am learning more and if we ever get some decent clear skies in Melbourne I'll take some longer exposures too.
I have seen images of M42 where the person had taken 4 separate sets of exposures with varying sub lengths to even out the detail.
I don't know if there are other methods that are easier?

Regards,
Tony.