I imagine on the strength of that incredible image, GSO could probably look forward to a few more sales in the near future..
Planewave, et al, must be looking over their shoulder with some degree of concern.
fantastic image paul, I had wondered about how far the halo extends also, so I'm glad to see you going for a deep image on this one. colour and galaxy look fantastic on full res
Stunning clarity in this image Paul! I use a GSO RC10'' and I compared your M83 image to my one. There's no comparison. Your one is just so much clearer. You must have some good seeing where you are in Australia. I'm in the lower North Island of New Zealand and from my experience, our atmospheric seeing is usually anything but good.
Thanks Michael, Andy, Russell and Greg for your comments. Much appreciated.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Peter Ward
They are good....but not that good.
...100x better...nah....but 2x maybe
Hmm perhaps I should not have used Magnitude. . The way I look at it in the seeing I get its like going from 5/10 to 7/10. I doubt it is measureable but it is definitely sharper.
He may have gone a little deeper?
You've done well to go up against a Planewave CDK20, EFL = 3420 mm.
cheers
Allan
I don't actually remember what Eric's integration time was on this target but given the aperture, his image would most likely be deeper.
Quote:
Originally Posted by clive milne
Wow, that is impressive..
Are you imaging from Arkaroola now Paul?
Thanks Clive, no not imaging from Arkaroola, still from near the coast of SA. My system is not stable enough to park it up there, it's a long drive if something goes wrong.
Quote:
Originally Posted by clive milne
I imagine on the strength of that incredible image, GSO could probably look forward to a few more sales in the near future..
Planewave, et al, must be looking over their shoulder with some degree of concern.
Yes I imagine my images provide an idea of what is capable with that size scope, albeit I have spent a lot of time fine tuning the system and been pretty particular about collimation. And; there is always minor issues to eliminate. The question then arises as to how much tinkering one is prepared to undertake. I wonder myself whether the average punter would be bothered and just be happy to pay the extra bucks for a better scope. These scopes certainly represent good value for dollars spent. I'll leave it up to others to decide if the scopes are real rivals.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stefan12
Stunning clarity in this image Paul! I use a GSO RC10'' and I compared your M83 image to my one. There's no comparison. Your one is just so much clearer. You must have some good seeing where you are in Australia. I'm in the lower North Island of New Zealand and from my experience, our atmospheric seeing is usually anything but good.
I do have very good seeing at Clayton on average. The odd night produces poor seeing but most nights the seeing is very high quality. This year the seeing has been pretty good with what appears to be the onset of another possible drought.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Peter Ward
I took the liberty of matching Paul's image to a image from a 20"CDK based at Arkaroola.
That pretty well demonstrates how much better another 8" of aperture in good seeing can do. Eric's image is so much sharper than mine, well at least to my eyes. Still I am pretty happy with what my budget scope can produce.
I see a Haese post, I know what's going to be there when I click - a frickin' awesome image - ANOTHER ONE, that just makes me want to give it all away.
I'm not sure I know enough swear words to have leave my mouth to get my images anywhere even remotely like this!!!!
But seriously - awesome image - again, and, in fact, you inspire me to go back out there curse all the problems and press on!
Paul, a superb image of this spectacular galaxy, really nice. Great colours and in addition to the large halo lots of faint background galaxies too.
As Peter mentioned, the outer areas seem softer than the centre, so you could possibly process so as to get the same nice resolution for the entire image as you've clearly achieved in the galaxy itself?
I must get around to make a serious effort on this galaxy some day...
Well done, you should be very pleased with those results. I for one fully appreciate the amount of background legwork and logistics it takes to get multiple hours of good data that can be fully stretched to the sky limit, especially from a remote site!
Now looking at the current image on my site linked above I realized how bland it appears!!! I had spruced up the color for that image back in Jan 2015 but must have forgotten to update the webpage
Rolf the softness is due to not using selective sharpening of the outer areas.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MisterC
Agreed. Something does not add up.
Seems very obvious the Emperor has no clothes but no one wants the state the bleedin' obvious...the PSF's in the center of the galaxy match Eric's data exactly.
Sorry a 12" doesn't trump a 20" ever
Here you go Mister C, here is a crop of a luminance Fit file. They all look like this. Feel free to accuse me of theft a little further if you like. Please note the diffraction spikes etc. Take a look through all my images in my gallery and see how sharp they are for the RC12 gear. My site has good seeing and I am using an AOX. I used decon in the processing and then masked the galaxy into the main lum master. That master was then sharpened further via masking. That master is then used as my luminance layer into my RGB data set in photoshop. I am highly insulted that you have suggested I used Eric's data. Feel free to apologise any time you like!!!
To save descent into a slanging match, I won't respond any further on this.
Lol, that's a really good way to have a discussion on a forum. Accuse someone of plagiarising someone elses work, then when the person provides evidence in the contrary you decide you aren't going to respond. Next time im down at Pauls watching the scope gather data for this image, or while im watching him stack the .fits maybe we could broadcast it on youtube to appease some nobody with 4 posts to his name.
Oh..please...if you are in a hole... stop digging.
Any photoshop hack can lift the color data to preserve the
luminance diffraction patterns.... well almost
Looks like you missed one North poining spike in the close binary
at 2 o'clock on the galaxy edge...it has no place in your GSO data
but...there it is!
Care to explain that?
Otherwise nice photoshop work...But you've lost all credibility with me.
To save descent into a slanging match, I won't respond any further on this.
LOL you are a funny little troll. So I cloned out one of the diffractions spikes on one star and not the other.
The RGB crop below show the diffraction spike there. If you care to have a good look. If you stretch the lum data the spike is there too.
It's clearly obvious that this data set it mine. If you look at the data sets in the comparison that Peter Ward made you can clearly see Eric's data is sharper than mine.
So you make an accusation without any evidence and then you bugger off into oblivion, any time you want to have a full look at the fits files you can and so too can anyone here. I am not a cheat nor a thief. I have been a member on this site for years and have a whole body of work that is evidence of my integrity and you come along with your 6 or so posts and try to accuse me of cheating.
Just to further add. Here is a crop of the summed lum data. Feel free to keep barking up the wrong tree mate. That is just with the decon done and not further sharpened in photoshop. If you like I can make an account on drop box and supply the summed Fits too. I have nothing to hide at all.
Oh..please...if you are in a hole... stop digging.
Any photoshop hack can lift the color data to preserve the
luminance diffraction patterns.... well almost
Looks like you missed one North poining spike in the close binary
at 2 o'clock on the galaxy edge...it has no place in your GSO data
but...there it is!
Care to explain that?
Otherwise nice photoshop work...But you've lost all credibility with me.
To save descent into a slanging match, I won't respond any further on this.
To MisterC,
Stop this non-sense please. If I had a beef with Paul I would pick up the phone and talk to him directly, like we do every so often.
To everyone else,
Ignore the above opinion and/or analysis, I don't buy it, I don't think you should either.
Seems very obvious the Emperor has no clothes but no one wants the state the bleedin' obvious...
the PSF's in the center of the galaxy match Eric's data exactly.
Sorry a 12" doesn't trump a 20" ever
I don't agree with you - whoever you are.
The point spread function of stars cannot be called the same.
What is your evidence of that?
Also - a 12" can trump a 20" if the seeing is better & adaptive optics are used.
You are forgiven for trying to ruin a really good thread.
. The way I look at it in the seeing I get its like going from 5/10 to 7/10. I doubt it is measureable but it is definitely sharper.
