Spiral Galaxy M83 12 hours 20minutes Repro

gregbradley · #1 23-11-2013, 11:00 AM

The Southern Classic galaxy - M83.

Up to 12 hours 20 minutes LRGB with this one. No doubt I will add to it at a later time.

CDK17 PME Proline 16803.

Crop view

http://upload.pbase.com/gregbradley/...53200173/large regular size
http://upload.pbase.com/image/153200139 large size

Widefield view:
http://upload.pbase.com/gregbradley/...53200139/large regular size
http://upload.pbase.com/gregbradley/...00139/original large size

Greg.

Larryp (Laurie) · #2 23-11-2013, 11:22 AM

That's excellent, Greg-so much detail

LightningNZ (Cam) · #3 23-11-2013, 12:11 PM

Pretty nasty dust donut in the bottom right part of M83.

Otherwise good image. I'm surprised though that there isn't more of a halo.

Cheers,
Cam

alpal · #4 23-11-2013, 01:06 PM

Nice work Greg.
There are a few doughnuts there so maybe you didn't take flats?
I reckon you might be tempted to re-process it or as you said add more data.

gregbradley · #5 23-11-2013, 01:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Larryp

That's excellent, Greg-so much detail

Thanks Larry. I have found M83 to be a tough target for some reason. So I am happy with this. I am sure I could get a better one from my dark site with this scope but as is this is doing well

Quote:

Originally Posted by LightningNZ

Pretty nasty dust donut in the bottom right part of M83.

Otherwise good image. I'm surprised though that there isn't more of a halo.

Cheers,
Cam

Thanks Cam. I fixed the donut (lots of flats instead of using the same ones too long I think) and upped the halo a tad. There was more in the luminance showing the hidden spiral arm up top right and lower left.
This is from semi rural skies so the halo will be brought up more with more exposure time over the months and also if I move my scope to darker skies.

I'll post an inverse stretched image later.

Greg.

Paul Haese · #6 23-11-2013, 03:27 PM

Only thing spoiling this image is the dust donuts. I can see 2 on the left had side, one near the galaxy on the right hand side.

Other than that the galaxy looks good. I take it these are all crops of some description. The stars look quite large to me, but the detail is quite good. What was the FWHM of the worst sub Greg?

SpaceNoob (Chris) · #7 23-11-2013, 03:49 PM

This would be a corker without those donuts dude, is it too late to get some more flats or did you modify the image train? This is such a cool target!

nebulosity. (Jo) · #8 23-11-2013, 09:21 PM

Nice one Greg, very colourful.

Jo

allan gould · #9 23-11-2013, 11:20 PM

Nice rendition of my favourite galaxy. Thanks for showing.

gregbradley · #10 24-11-2013, 12:41 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SpaceNoob

This would be a corker without those donuts dude, is it too late to get some more flats or did you modify the image train? This is such a cool target!

There must have been a change from the time I took the flats. Anyway its an interesting exercise in image processing how to correct that. I have done some correction on it and I think its better. There are a few approaches to the problem.

Quote:

Originally Posted by nebulosity.

Nice one Greg, very colourful.

Jo

Thanks Jo.

Quote:

Originally Posted by allan gould

Nice rendition of my favourite galaxy. Thanks for showing.

Cheers Allan.

Greg.

leinad (Dan) · #11 24-11-2013, 04:07 AM

Very nice. Interesting to see the results people get on this one.

I'd like to revisit this one again, it seems to have quite a disminishing return with the number of integrations you get.
I guess the faint cloudy and clumpy spiral arms can only present so much degree of detail.

The background is a little too clipped for my taste. Do you have a smaller pixel size camera? Interested how this would look on an 8300 with your CDK.

multiweb (Marc) · #12 24-11-2013, 08:44 AM

Very nice shot Greg. You've some nice colors.

RickS (Rick) · #13 24-11-2013, 09:44 AM

Nice colours, Greg. Looks good. As was mentioned, I think you may have lost some of the faint extended areas of the galaxy in the processing?

gregbradley · #14 24-11-2013, 09:44 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by leinad

Very nice. Interesting to see the results people get on this one.

I'd like to revisit this one again, it seems to have quite a disminishing return with the number of integrations you get.
I guess the faint cloudy and clumpy spiral arms can only present so much degree of detail.

The background is a little too clipped for my taste. Do you have a smaller pixel size camera? Interested how this would look on an 8300 with your CDK.

Background is a bit dark. I'll have a go with PI and Startools to clean up the dust donuts that got through callibration. Startools has a tool that seems to target these. Now to get Startools to load properly.
I used the 8300 on the CDK on M83 and it was a poor image. It shows up the seeing too much. Maybe with an AO unit to tame it or a night of good seeing.

Quote:

Originally Posted by multiweb

Very nice shot Greg. You've some nice colors.

Cheers Marc.

Greg.

leinad (Dan) · #15 24-11-2013, 05:33 PM

For sure, get yourself an AO unit !

gregbradley · #16 24-11-2013, 05:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by leinad

For sure, get yourself an AO unit !

Its at the top of my list!

Greg.

gregbradley · #17 25-11-2013, 08:58 PM

Star Tools to the rescue. It did the best job of getting rid or reducing the dust donuts and made a more pleasing less overly black background whilst still able to keep the galaxy bright and the halo shown more.

Its a good program.

Crop View:

http://upload.pbase.com/gregbradley/...53200173/large regular size
http://upload.pbase.com/image/153200139 large size

Widefield view:
http://upload.pbase.com/gregbradley/...53200139/large regular size
http://upload.pbase.com/gregbradley/...00139/original large size

Same links as before

Greg.

astronobob (Bob) · #18 26-11-2013, 03:04 PM

Love these galaxies at this resolution and color Greg ! Much Envy yep !

Merlin66 (Ken) · #19 26-11-2013, 03:35 PM

Greg,
certainly a labour of love!!!
I'd be interested in a comparison of a 3hr image (v's 12) - it should have twice the noise but will contain the same amount of detail.

gregbradley · #20 26-11-2013, 04:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by astronobob

Love these galaxies at this resolution and color Greg ! Much Envy yep !

Thanks Bob. I'll do another version next year up around the 20 hour mark. I'll keep adding to it. The advantage of keeping a database and using the same gear.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Merlin66

Greg,
certainly a labour of love!!!
I'd be interested in a comparison of a 3hr image (v's 12) - it should have twice the noise but will contain the same amount of detail.

Yes that's about right. 12 hours gives cleaner images and ability to take more processing. A more solid signal.

Greg.