NGC2442 (The Meathook Galaxy)

Geoff45 (Geoff) · #1 17-02-2016, 12:08 PM

It's been a long while since my last posting. Weather and equipment--when one was good the other was bad. Lodestar back to Starlight Xpress for repair. That came back, then the FLI camera played up. Fortunately it was still under warranty, so Bintel coughed up for the postage back to the States. Very good of them.
Anyway, I got this one in fits and starts over Jan and Feb. Lots more data than the three hours I ended up putting in the final result, but the seeing was often quite mediocre and I had to cull ruthlessly. I found this one really hard to process. It's actually a very faint object, especially in the blue channel.
Low res here
http://www.astrobin.com/239225/0/
and higher res here
http://www.astrobin.com/full/239225/0/.
Lots of interesting fuzzies lurking through the pic and a nice little star cluster that looks like an artifact in the smaller version, just above the elliptical fuzzy on the lower right.

Details:
Exposure: 3 hours at 18 x 10 min LRGB, all binned 1 x 1
Camera: FLI Proline 16803
Mount: AP900
Telescope: 12.5" Plane Wave CDK
FOV: 35' x 27' (cropped)
Processing: PixInsight.

Placidus (Mike and Trish) · #2 17-02-2016, 12:49 PM

Hi, Geoff,

Nice to hear from you.

The detail in the core is very tight, and nicely processed. Very fine.

Best,
Mike

RickS (Rick) · #3 17-02-2016, 01:12 PM

Sorry to hear of your equipment and weather woes, Geoff. The weather has been so bad here I haven't had the gear out to check if it is still working!

That's a nice result on the Meathook. Would love to see it with a bit more data, of course

Have you tried using the poorer subs with a strong FWHM weighting? It's something I have been playing around with. Still haven't decided if it is worth the trouble.

Cheers,
Rick.

Flugel88 (Michael) · #4 17-02-2016, 01:15 PM

Sorry to hear about your camera Woes Geoff.
Seeing conditions and weather has been a real drag for me too up in Newcastle.

Though i think you meat hook looks good for only 3 hours@f8.

Geoff45 (Geoff) · #5 17-02-2016, 02:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Placidus

Hi, Geoff,

Nice to hear from you.

The detail in the core is very tight, and nicely processed. Very fine.

Best,
Mike

Thanks Mike. I struggled with this one on and off for more than a week, then suddenly it all worked out.

Quote:

Originally Posted by RickS

Sorry to hear of your equipment and weather woes, Geoff. The weather has been so bad here I haven't had the gear out to check if it is still working!

That's a nice result on the Meathook. Would love to see it with a bit more data, of course

Have you tried using the poorer subs with a strong FWHM weighting? It's something I have been playing around with. Still haven't decided if it is worth the trouble.

Cheers,
Rick.

Thanks Rick
Weather and equipment--life would be boring without them wouldn't it?
I haven't tried the FWHM weighting--can't hurt to try.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Flugel88

Sorry to hear about your camera Woes Geoff.
Seeing conditions and weather has been a real drag for me too up in Newcastle.

Though i think you meat hook looks good for only 3 hours@f8.

Thanks Michael. The weather seems to have been universally bad.

Geoff

strongmanmike (Michael) · #6 17-02-2016, 04:09 PM

Really nice work Geoff, it's a great field, well done

. Rick has a point, it's kinda what I do at times, I construct different versions using stacks of similar level FWHM and then blend the best bits of each (nothing profound and I'm sure many others do the same) given my almost complete jealousy of every clear moment, I waste very little data.

Mike

Regulus (Trevor) · #7 17-02-2016, 04:13 PM

That's a beautiful photo to look at Geoff. Nice detail. Nice subdued colour.
Well done.

Trev

Atmos (Colin) · #8 17-02-2016, 04:14 PM

As always, more data will help but we can only work with what we're given. Still looking pretty good so far

plantnerd (Luis) · #9 17-02-2016, 04:21 PM

Stunning galaxy love the faint blue details around the spiral arms. Must be some very fine data coming out of your big scope there and great processing also keep up the amazing work mate.

Geoff45 (Geoff) · #10 17-02-2016, 05:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by strongmanmike

Really nice work Geoff, it's a great field, well done

. Rick has a point, it's kinda what I do at times, I construct different versions using stacks of similar level FWHM and then blend the best bits of each (nothing profound and I'm sure many others do the same) given my almost complete jealousy of every clear moment, I waste very little data.

Mike

Thanks Mike. So did you notice the subtle(?) decon, noise reduction and sharpening? I tried to keep them low key.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Regulus

That's a beautiful photo to look at Geoff. Nice detail. Nice subdued colour.
Well done.

Trev

Thanks Trev.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Atmos

As always, more data will help but we can only work with what we're given. Still looking pretty good so far

Thta's right. Without the luxury of a remote site we can't be too picky about the data we get.

Quote:

Originally Posted by plantnerd

Stunning galaxy love the faint blue details around the spiral arms. Must be some very fine data coming out of your big scope there and great processing also keep up the amazing work mate.

Thanks Luis. Glad you like it. The final image surprised me quite a bit after my first few disastrous attempts.

strongmanmike (Michael) · #11 17-02-2016, 05:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Geoff45

Thanks Mike. So did you notice the subtle(?) decon, noise reduction and sharpening? I tried to keep them low key.

Weeeellll..I diiiid

but it was hardly noticeable and I've decided to not play my broken record anymore unless it is obvious

Mike

Geoff45 (Geoff) · #12 17-02-2016, 05:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by strongmanmike

Weeeellll..I diiiid

but it was hardly noticeable and I've decided to not play my broken record anymore unless it is obvious

Mike

Cheers Mike! Problem is the temptation to try for noise elimination instead of noise reduction.

gregbradley · #13 17-02-2016, 05:55 PM

Nice job of this one Geoff. I personally don't think its the most photogenic galaxy but it can come up nicely.

What was wrong with your Proline?

As far as scrapping poor FWHM subs I do that as well. It depends on how bad they are though. Sometimes the difference in star sizes between a night of good seeing and not so great seeing is a lot so in that case I am likely to not use the weaker subs.
This is where the 12 inch F3.8 pays dividends as every sub is not quite so precious in order to get a decent image at the end.

Greg.

Geoff45 (Geoff) · #14 17-02-2016, 06:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by gregbradley

Nice job of this one Geoff. I personally don't think its the most photogenic galaxy but it can come up nicely.

What was wrong with your Proline?

Thanks Greg. See the thumbnail. Something to do with the clocking rate needing adjustment.

gregbradley · #15 17-02-2016, 06:15 PM

Those diffraction spikes? Some of them are just a spike.
I see.

Greg.