Thanks everyone :-)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Atmos
Pretty good for limited data. How do ylu feel the 108s exposures went? I assume it would have helped somewhat keeping the FWHM down lower, easier to process?
|
The 108s RGB subs were ok, but sub length, as with the 36s L subs, were selected due to a silly stuff-up in my math.
I'm not convinced subs of this sort of duration is sufficiently short enough to have much of a beneficial impact on imaging, and it's hard to determine any such impact.
For example, I've moved on to the Antennae at the moment and have been getting more "better" subs with 144s (yes, I went to 144 afterall lol) luminance. Both the subs from the sombrero and the antennae are in the same ballpark, but if you had to pick any set as being better, it would be the antennae since more of them were on the lower end of the range. I'd put it down to better focus and/or seeing that night though.
I still think shorter subs are probably more difficult to process since your detail is closer to the darker, noisier background, but I'm also not sure how you could quantify that.
Quote:
Originally Posted by astronobob
Nice going Lee - good details for the F/Length 
Inspiring also, as I'm hoping to do this next month, LP skies in the burbs, so, plenty of short subs I assume ... |
Cheers mate, good luck with your attempt on this one, looking forward to seeing it! Short subs can definitely work and with more LP you'll be better off with shorter subs, just have to make sure you get enough overall integration time.
