NGC 3621 - delicate low surface brightness galaxy in Hydra
At 12' X 5' NGC 3621 in Hydra is a modest size SBcd spiral galaxy with very faint outer arms. It is about half the angular size of NGC 6744 in Pavo and at 22.3 mag/squ arc sec, has almost as low surface brightness, so it is a challenge to image well.
There are many background galaxies visible but the largest (still well under one arc min in size) and just above NGC 3621 in this framing, is the prominent 16th magnitude face on Sab spiral galaxy PGC 34490
Half the luminance was taken under reasonably good seeing conditions the other half under fairly average seeing and as usual no darks, no flats etc
That is a lovely one to go Galaxy deep diving on, I think I got up to about a count of 10-11 before I realised I was nose to the monitor and had been sitting there for 5 mins having a surf.
Are the stars in the galaxy a bit pink? It seems slightly mauve/pink around the arms and I am not sure if these are simply the active regions or a colour balance thing?
My favourite fuzzy is definitely the elongated S just above and to the right of PGC 34490.
Love your work. Especially with no flats, darks or bias nonsense.
That is a lovely one to go Galaxy deep diving on, I think I got up to about a count of 10-11 before I realised I was nose to the monitor and had been sitting there for 5 mins having a surf.
Are the stars in the galaxy a bit pink? It seems slightly mauve/pink around the arms and I am not sure if these are simply the active regions or a colour balance thing?
My favourite fuzzy is definitely the elongated S just above and to the right of PGC 34490.
Love your work. Especially with no flats, darks or bias nonsense.
Cheers
Chris
He he Cheers Chris
Yeah, I like that little S galaxy too, just think, probably has a few billion stars in it
Re the stars..? not sure, I can' see the pink stars on my monitor ..?..the HII regions along the arms and in the core are quite fine and star like though...?
You have proven that amateurs are catching up with professionals.
well done
cheers
Allan
Hi Al, yeah saw all those already, was looking at Gendlers and its great but the sharpening artefacts are a bit obvious aaaand just to annoy everyone I wanted a little more colour
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rod771
Very nice image Mike!
My eyes actually kept getting drawn to PGC 34490, little bit of nice detail there
No flats, yes that would be nice.
Cheers Rod, yes that galaxy is very cool, just big enough to show some cool shape but small enough to look reeeeally far away and yes, not needing darks or flats and usually no need for gradient removal or much noise reduction is a great capability and makes processing so quick and easy.
Quote:
Originally Posted by gregbradley
Very nice Mike. It is a faint one. Great colour and detail and as always your stars look great.
Greg.
Thanks Greg, yes the outer arms are indeed faint, in fact Martin needed some 8hrs of Lum binned 2X2 for these outer arms in his version...12" @ F3.8 with this little sensitive Sony chip has some advantages
Great data & detail Mike but the garish colours in this one spoil it for me I'm afraid.
Cheers, Marcus
Ahhh it's Beige Davies GarishGarish huh? ...fair enough ...but hang on, you don't like narrowband colours either (fussy bustard)...meah, it's just a phase...it will grow on you too...it will if enough people can be expoooosed ...maybe... or I'll grow out of it ...I prefer to call them vibrant
MIke
Last edited by strongmanmike; 05-03-2014 at 10:09 PM.
Hi Al, yeah saw all those already, was looking at Gendlers and its great but
the sharpening artefacts are a bit obvious aaaand just to annoy everyone I wanted a little more colour
Cheers Louie
Hi Mike,
Gendler's published image is only 553 KByte in size:
Maybe that explains the artifacts?
It's actually got some awful green parts just under the galaxy.
However - I think everyone -including me - has become a little too fussy lately.
As for the colour debate:
Maybe we need to publish 2 results with every image i.e.
- one with fairly tame pastel colours & another boosted with LAB mode
in order to please everyone?
Maybe that explains the artifacts?
It's actually got some awful green parts just under the galaxy.
However - I think everyone -including me - has become a little too fussy lately.
As for the colour debate:
Maybe we need to publish 2 results with every image i.e.
- one with fairly tame pastel colours & another boosted with LAB mode
in order to please everyone?
cheers
Allan
Ah nah, it's all good, differing opinions is a healthy thing as long as we don't get too wound up and cranky ()
As for Robbo's image and I'm not criticising juuuust observing , there are tell tale signs of de convolution remaining on the stars, they are bright points inside more defuse discs and the background is evenly speckled, the gradients are pretty obvious too I know the theory is probably sound but I always doubt the accuracy of deconvolution and how people apply it, how does the filter know to shrink a feature so that it remains the actual shape it should be rather than just get shrunk to a point with arbitrary or in fact differing shape and thus simply creating more of an illusion of higher resolution...?There is also a magenta hue to the core area too..ok, ok sorry Rob not being critical it was an APOD after all
..?..the HII regions along the arms and in the core are quite fine and star like though...?
no need for that, nose on screen does that 
...fair enough 
or I'll grow out of it 
) 
, there are tell tale signs of de convolution remaining on the stars, they are bright points inside more defuse discs and the background is evenly speckled, the gradients are pretty obvious too 
