Eta C11/Hyperstar Ha - Repro

[multiweb (Marc)]

Taking on board a few comments re:dynamic range and others, I spent a bit more time processing and I'm re-posting this. There's only one large version here [1.5MB] that is more user friendly as far as downmload size goes. Thanks for looking again. I think this one looks better.

[sheeny (Al)]

I like it Marc! Very nice indeed!

Al.

[TrevorW]

Very good repo Marc

[danielsun]

Very nice Marc.

Cheers Daniel.

[multiweb (Marc)]

Originally Posted by sheeny

I like it Marc! Very nice indeed!

Al.

Originally Posted by TrevorW

Very good repo Marc

Originally Posted by danielsun

Very nice Marc.

Cheers Daniel.

Thanks for the feedback guys. I'll start some Oiii next then Sii and try to finish those panels weather pending.

[browndog (Ian)]

That looks great. Lots of faint nebulosity and pin-point stars. Top shot

Please post again when you have the additional OIII and SII data. I am very interested to see how this image evolves.

[CoolhandJo (Paul)]

Repo magic! Like the 1.5 meg..

[multiweb (Marc)]

Originally Posted by browndog

That looks great. Lots of faint nebulosity and pin-point stars. Top shot

Please post again when you have the additional OIII and SII data. I am very interested to see how this image evolves.

Thanks Ian. Yeah I will as I plan to do Oiii next. Most likely I will use registar for the final registration and CCDStack to run some deconvolution to match the star sizes to the Ha.

Originally Posted by CoolhandJo

Repo magic! Like the 1.5 meg..

Thanks Paul - glad you liked it. That's my best image to date and I'm very happy with it. The hyperstar caught enough light for me to play with all the different shades of gray. My favourite bit is the twirl on the right hand side extending from the keyhole region to the gabriela mistral nebula. I like the transition from dark neb over a light background to light wisps over a darker background. There are also a lot of little areas where this time I got details that were blurred or non existant in previous attempts.

[Bassnut (Fred)]

Thats much better Marc, now you can see the detail. The thumbnail doesnt do the image any favours tho, very artifacty, much too small for such a large image

[multiweb (Marc)]

Originally Posted by Bassnut

Thats much better Marc, now you can see the detail. The thumbnail doesnt do the image any favours tho, very artifacty, much too small for such a large image

Thanks Fred. Yes you can only squeeze that much data in 200KB. The thumbnail is meant to show the extent of the area covered by the original though so people know it is a widefield.