At 5,500 light years distant, the Cat's Paw nebula NGC 6334 is an emission nebula with a red colour that originates from an abundance of ionised hydrogen atoms. Alternatively known as the Bear Claw Nebula, stars nearly ten times the mass of our Sun have been born there in only the past few million years. Pictured here is a deep field image of the Cat's Paw Nebula in light emitted by hydrogen, oxygen, and sulphur. (text from Apod).
Third finished image from the big Tak/QSI 6162/Chroma combo now that the field field is aaaallllllmost flat (after considerable re-machining of the focuser faces, thanks Stefan Buda!).
This is a Ha rich region, so have deliberately allowed some of the background nebulosity to show through. The Chroma 5nm filter worked a treat as the Ha was taken just 30 degrees from a full moon!
To me it resembles a genie pouring out of the magic lamp!
Ha - 11x1200secs
O3-17 x 1800 secs
S2- 10x1200secs
RG&B 10x180 secs ea.
Captured using Ekos on a Mac.
The Melbourne weather has not been kind this winter, so data gathering opportunities have been scarce - and it's hard to follow Suavi's excellent version from a few years ago, but I've given it my best shot!
Nice looking rendition there Andy, a very fiery look and I see the Genie. Some funky sharpening used too I see...holds up ok though, even in the full res The field looks well corrected to me , some funky work from sunny Melbourne
Cheers Marc - I wonder what the heck is that thing anyway?
Quote:
Originally Posted by strongmanmike
Nice looking rendition there Andy, a very fiery look and I see the Genie. Some funky sharpening used too I see...holds up ok though, even in the full res The field looks well corrected to me , some funky work from sunny Melbourne
Mike
Thanks very much Mike I'm impressed by the resolution of this imaging combo now that it's just about sorted - and Topaz NR with a touch of sharpening worked a treat!
Quote:
Originally Posted by gregbradley
A very striking image Andy and I like that because this object is usually super boring.
You have gotten your setup almost flawless now. It can take a while eh?
It looks like you'll have many great images in the future with that setup.
Greg.
Thanks Greg! Sure has taken some time and while it's 95% there now, it's still not quite right in all cnrs. But I now know what's left to do.
Appreciate the comment about the image - there's been a few goodn's posted including Suavi's so I didn't want to dissappoint
Andy, there's no question you've got some very nice data there which is revealing some excellent detail! Nicely done.
Sorry if this sounds harsh, but the saturation is way over the top. I understand that some people like this super saturated neon look, but I don't like it when my eyes start hurting . Your choice of course.
If it were me I'd dial the saturation back by 20-25%, remove the blue cast over the image and raise the black point a bit
Quote:
Originally Posted by gregbradley
... this object is usually super boring.
Couldn't disagree with you more Greg! Depends how you process it!
(for Marcus: stepping outside after a few Magaritas in a Casino, the colours will look just fine)
Also, I'm still not sure about the Irish Protestant palette you seem to like....but hey your similar orange renditions got APOD's.. so what would I know?
If it were me I'd dial the saturation back by 20-25%, remove the blue cast over the image and raise the black point a bit
..well Marcus..?..do it, your end, easy, problem solved, everybody is'a happy'a campa!
I do see the blue cast in the dark areas but hey, I don't mind that but you know me and blue Although both are brightness/shade calibrated against this to ensure I don't miss any faint stuff , I use two different screens, side by side, one a Samsung, has very slightly muted colours the other a hp, has more vibrant contrasty colours and the blue is not that noticeable on my lower contrast more muted screen ...I don't mind a tad of blue in black backgrounds, especially in and around such a busy bright nebula, I recon it looks kinda ok
(for Marcus: stepping outside after a few Magaritas in a Casino, the colours will look just fine)
I said the saturation was too high Peter - not the colours. In fact the fundamental colouring looks fine to me, especially since (almost) anything goes with NB.
Quote:
Originally Posted by strongmanmike
...I do see the blue cast in the dark areas but hey, I don't mind that but you know me and blue Although both are brightness/shade calibrated against this to ensure I don't miss any faint stuff , I use two different screens, side by side, one a Samsung, has very slightly muted colours the other a hp, has more vibrant contrasty colours and the blue is not that noticeable on my lower contrast more muted screen ...I don't mind a tad of blue in black backgrounds, especially in and around such a busy bright nebula, I recon it looks kinda ok
Mike
Can't Andy can speak for himself Mike? You can give me chapter and verse on why you think blue casts are good, but that doesn't change my viewpoint - which is all I was giving.
Can't Andy can speak for himself Mike? You can give me chapter and verse on why you think blue casts are good, but that doesn't change my viewpoint - which is all I was giving.
I said the saturation was too high Peter - not the colours. In fact the fundamental colouring looks fine to me, especially since (almost) anything goes with NB.
I guess I was being obtuse...yes bright/saturated/neon was what I meant....but they do tend to dull with a splash of Tequila
Cheers Marc - I wonder what the heck is that thing anyway?
I vaguely recall someone telling me once it could be a bubble expanding not unlike the crab nebula. So maybe something exploded there and it's expanding. These things usually have polarized light so you can try imaging that bit with a polarized filter and rotate it 90 degrees twice and map to RGB each set. Seen that done for the crab.
Andy, there's no question you've got some very nice data there which is revealing some excellent detail! Nicely done.
Sorry if this sounds harsh, but the saturation is way over the top. I understand that some people like this super saturated neon look, but I don't like it when my eyes start hurting . Your choice of course.
If it were me I'd dial the saturation back by 20-25%, remove the blue cast over the image and raise the black point a bit
Hi Marcus,
Thanks for your feedback! You know I'm a fan of your galaxy images.
That being said, I don't care for vanilla flavoured NB images, (seems like a wasted opportunity) so I spent a long time deciding on my colour palette and rendering it without generating bucketloads of colour noise along the way - as such, I'm very happy with this result after a day's processing
Anyway, PM me your address and I'll send you some eclipse sunnies for your eyes!
Seriously though, when I first saw Suavi's I thought, bam - that's how the Cat's Paw is done and it's been on my bucket list to visit ever since, so yes - it's shamelessly Andyfied!
Quote:
Originally Posted by Peter Ward
It certainly has that Vegas Strip dazzle!
Also, I'm still not sure about the Irish Protestant palette you seem to like....but hey your similar orange renditions got APOD's.. so what would I know?
Nicely done
Ha ha, yes, Viva Las Vegas baby! Cheers Peter
Quote:
Originally Posted by strongmanmike
I do see the blue cast in the dark areas but hey, I don't mind that but you know me and blue I recon it looks kinda ok
Mike
Cheers Mike, it's ok - Marcus is entitled to his opinion & I respect that. Nothing wrong with a robust sharing of views, all done respectfully etc. Thanks for chiming in though
Quote:
Originally Posted by multiweb
I vaguely recall someone telling me once it could be a bubble expanding not unlike the crab nebula. So maybe something exploded there and it's expanding. These things usually have polarized light so you can try imaging that bit with a polarized filter and rotate it 90 degrees twice and map to RGB each set. Seen that done for the crab.
Fascinating - thanks for that Marc
Maybe M&T can add their thoughts on the origin of the sponge as well?
Well what can I say, it doesn't get much better that. I'm at Boronia, we suffer the same light pollution. I would swap to mono like a shot, if I thought could get the same results for Galaxies.
I've been a fan of your work for a while now, and while I don't have the passion to image nebulae (I prefer the planets myself), I do enjoy your renditions of these objects. I've seen a few images of the Cat's Paw nebula, but none of them have the drama of yours, it looks like the whole area is exploding in a massive fireball! (which it probably is, just over a long period of time) .
Your style is certainly weighted towards highly saturated images, and maybe if you applied the same approach to the planets I may have an objection, but I reckon that to criticize your images for being too saturated is like criticizing the ocean for being too wet.
Well what can I say, it doesn't get much better that. I'm at Boronia, we suffer the same light pollution. I would swap to mono like a shot, if I thought could get the same results for Galaxies.
Cheers
Peter
Cheers Peter! Yes, if we could image Galaxies from home I would join you!
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tulloch
Thanks for posting this Andy, simply stunning!
... but I reckon that to criticize your images for being too saturated is like criticizing the ocean for being too wet.
Andrew
Lol, cheers - I just about fell off my chair when I read this!
Lol, cheers - I just about fell off my chair when I read this!
Heh, glad it gave you a laugh
Quote:
Originally Posted by Andy01
Cheers Peter! Yes, if we could image Galaxies from home I would join you!
If I could ask you to expand on this point please, because in between planetary seasons I would like to get out and try imaging some galaxies in my back yard (well, so far I've imaged the sum total of one, and not very well at that ), why are the techniques so different between nebulae and galaxies? Planetary and DSO imaging are pretty much opposites (which I found out the hard way), why so for nebulae?
Heh, glad it gave you a laugh
If I could ask you to expand on this point please, because in between planetary seasons I would like to get out and try imaging some galaxies in my back yard (well, so far I've imaged the sum total of one, and not very well at that ), why are the techniques so different between nebulae and galaxies? Planetary and DSO imaging are pretty much opposites (which I found out the hard way), why so for nebulae?
Thanks, Andrew
Hey Andrew,
Galaxies are generally shot broadband ie: LRGB/visible light.
Nebulae can be imaged that way as well, but this requires pristine dark skies, with no Light pollution.
However unlike galaxies, nebs can also be imaged in narrowband using special filters that only allow light emitted by the ionized gases in the nebs to reach the sensor.
This means that nebs can then be imaged from light polluted & moonlit conditions ie: my backyard. However, these are ‘false colour’ images similar to those taken by Hubble etc.
Bottom line, unless you’re a very experienced imager, (and there are some here) best to image galaxies from a dark site!
Cheers
Andy
OK, thanks Andy. Naively I just figured that you could capture narrow band images of the galaxy in a similar way to nebulae, assign each a colour and then just combine them the same way.
You don't seem to have any problem imaging "white" stars with your setup, or was that done with the RGB filters?
I guess light pollution filters can help somewhat, but not like being at a dark site.
, some funky work from sunny Melbourne 
. Your choice of course.
Although both are brightness/shade calibrated against 
, I use two different screens, side by side, one a Samsung, has very slightly muted colours the other a hp, has more vibrant contrasty colours and the blue is not that noticeable on my lower contrast more muted screen 
