The textures coming out in the central region around the hourglass are reminiscent of Fred's starless APOD was my initial impression. Lovely 3D feel even with only that much data.
Nice work Peter, good to see some more data from you and looking forward to the final result.
Josh
Ta...could be bigger than Ben-Hur
Quote:
Originally Posted by RobF
The textures coming out in the central region around the hourglass are reminiscent of Fred's starless APOD was my initial impression. Lovely 3D feel even with only that much data.
(Marc wil be in heaven )
As yes, Freddo's starless wonder.
Doing the math 5 hours would be the same flux down the pipe as 20 hours in, say a 6" refractor, then maybe I could claim "uber-deep" status to the data ..... wonder if it would be worth it
Doing the math 5 hours would be the same flux down the pipe as 20 hours in, say a 6" refractor, then maybe I could claim "uber-deep" status to the data ..... wonder if it would be worth it
Very cute Mike... not sure about the relevance (if I went 5 hours on M8, I think it would look the same, just with less noise )...... plus I already have a perfectly serviceable "finger" image.
For interested bystanders, the attached "finger" enlargement is an oversampled crop from my RCOS14 image from some time ago...
God I wish I could take images like that and process them as well as you do. Beautiful M8 for a lazy 1 hours worth.
Mark
Thank you very much Mark, but I'm sure you will be doing the same soon enough, it's a bit like computer programming, "learn how to program by programming"
As for the 1 hour exposure...if I said it was 4 hours with my AP155 Starfire
there might be some approving "oh-ah's"... but really it's all about flux and object brightness.
Simple arithmetic can show that my 12" gather's light 4x faster than my 6". So rather than struggle for 4 hours with the smaller scope I can get the same result with a larger one in 1/4 of the time. This point seems lost on some..particularly those with big ego's
Professional Astronomers use *very large* telescopes for very similar reasons (ie. lack of observing time)
Very smooth Peter and you're definitely respecting the light! Look forward to the colour. Surprised you don't have an 8300 on that RH.
Cheers, Marcus
Thanks Marcus... the light/shadow is a result of my slow discovery of how to use PixInsight...aye carrumba..heavy stuff...but getting there!
As for the STT8300...not a great match for the Honders, which I think likes deep, rather than small pixels.
The 8300 works better with the FSQ, (and oddly, at much longer focal lengths with the AO-8T) .... I'll put the RCOS back on the mount and do some hi-res galaxy imaging one day...but I'm having too much fun with the Honders at the moment.
Are you working on a colour NB image of M8 as part of your bigger project??
I did a Hubble palette version last year. If the young grasshopper may make a suggestion to the Master, I reckon you might get some more definition around the core by using some sort of HDR compression (HDR Multiscale Transform worked for me in PI)
Streuth....I've only had the software for 48 hours and was flat-chat getting this (mono) image out
When it comes to PI ..I'm very much happy to concede *I'm* the grasshopper here
You'll be a PI convert in no time. Highly recommend Harry Page's Video Tutorials, as well as Warren Keller's DVD - the info on deconvolution was excellent.
HDRMT has 6 layers as a default, sometimes you need more layers, sometimes less. Haven't worked out why yet??? I think more worked for my M8.
)
..... wonder if it would be worth it 
... plus I already have a perfectly serviceable "finger" image. 
