RCW58 now with added high rez data

[gregbradley]

Originally Posted by Geoff45

Nicely captured Greg. Those RCW objects are often very interesting. We should pay them more attention.
Geoff

Thanks Geoff. It is an obscure object. Sakib sent me a list of them to image over time.

Greg.

[Placidus (Mike and Trish)]

The fainter structures in the nebula are clearer and more defined now. Also, the extra exposure has allowed slightly more contrasty presentation.

[Ryderscope (Rodney)]

Wow, it does jump out more. Agree with Geoff's comment as well that these RCW objects need more attention..

[Retrograde (Pete)]

Very nice image of a rather obscure object Greg. The additional data really does makes a difference to those fine details.

[Regulus (Trevor)]

yep, that's improved the detail somewhat Greg. it's an amazing structure, and one I hadn't seen before.
Cheers - Trev

[gregbradley]

Originally Posted by Placidus

The fainter structures in the nebula are clearer and more defined now. Also, the extra exposure has allowed slightly more contrasty presentation.

Originally Posted by Ryderscope

Wow, it does jump out more. Agree with Geoff's comment as well that these RCW objects need more attention..

This one is one of the better RCW objects. Some are a little boring.

Originally Posted by Retrograde

Very nice image of a rather obscure object Greg. The additional data really does makes a difference to those fine details.

Thanks. The CDK plays well with the Honders data so its a good trick to have up my sleeve.

Originally Posted by Regulus

yep, that's improved the detail somewhat Greg. it's an amazing structure, and one I hadn't seen before.
Cheers - Trev

It is an interesting shape. A bit like the Helix without the O111 nebula.

Greg.

[Shiraz (Ray)]

haven't seen that one before - intriguing object and pleasing image.

The detail is very good - you must have been some good seeing

[gregbradley]

Originally Posted by Shiraz

haven't seen that one before - intriguing object and pleasing image.

The detail is very good - you must have been some good seeing

Thanks Ray. The seeing was probably fine but the detail is mostly coming from the CDK17 and it does a pretty good job usually getting detail.

Greg.

[Ross G]

A great capture Greg.

What a beautiful object!

Ross.

[gregbradley]

Originally Posted by Ross G

A great capture Greg.

What a beautiful object!

Ross.

Thanks Ross. I'll definitely do another version of this next year when it comes around again. Its quite a find.

Greg.

[Slawomir (Suavi)]

Now, how did I manage to miss his beauty?!

Really nice work Greg, I think it is great you took time to image a much less popular target. Please keep them coming.

[gregbradley]

Originally Posted by Slawomir

Now, how did I manage to miss his beauty?!

Really nice work Greg, I think it is great you took time to image a much less popular target. Please keep them coming.

Thanks Suavi. I intend to do some more obscure stuff in amongst the more usual targets. It keeps it interesting.

Greg.

[RB (Andrew)]

I missed this too.

Lovely shot Greg, a very interesting object.
Thanks for sharing.



RB

[gregbradley]

Originally Posted by RB

I missed this too.

Lovely shot Greg, a very interesting object.
Thanks for sharing.



RB

Thanks RB. Its an interesting object. A bit like the Helix without the O111 aspect. The radial spikes are like the Helix though.

Greg.

[Peter Ward]

Not sure what to say here....a very interesting object for sure , but the dark sharpening/rebound rings around the stars is not a good look for me.

Processing should not introduce things that simply are not real....and sure..there is no legislation here...simply my fearless and frank 2 cents worth

I'd really like to see more of this object through your CDK's optics.

Lord knows, the seeing effects at that focal length can be an absolute pain...but the rewards when it co-operates are sublime.

[gregbradley]

Originally Posted by Peter Ward

Not sure what to say here....a very interesting object for sure , but the dark sharpening/rebound rings around the stars is not a good look for me.

Processing should not introduce things that simply are not real....and sure..there is no legislation here...simply my fearless and frank 2 cents worth

I'd really like to see more of this object through your CDK's optics.

Lord knows, the seeing effects at that focal length can be an absolute pain...but the rewards when it co-operates are sublime.

Thanks Peter. Its a little since I processed it but I don't recall doing any decon or sharpening on stars. In fact I did very little processing on it at all. What is rebound?
Seeing was poor and star sizes were large and probably the red subs had larger stars as red was most likely taken when the object was lowest (it was pretty low to start with not being the ideal time to image this one). But I will keep your advice in mind. I agree stars are best left to minimal processing and its better to concentrate on the data acquisition making sure everything there is working at its best.

Greg.