Quote:
Originally Posted by gregbradley
That's a wonderful image Ray. Haven't seen that one before. Do you think that is a companion galaxy below and to the left of the main galaxy?
It seems it may creating some distortions in the main galaxies shape. A longer exposure may pick up some tidal streams perhaps. You can see some disturbances in the right hand side of the galaxy.
Hard to believe its only 4.25 hours to get a result like that. I also think that is excellent processing.
Greg.
|
thanks very much Greg. As I understand it, the two main galaxies are about 90 million light years away and they are probably interacting. There is another quite separate pair of background galaxies that are about 265 million light years away and they are possibly also interacting with each other - they are the beautiful elliptical "ball" appearing to just touch the big galaxy and the "feather" edge on spiral shining through it. Quite a spectacular grouping really.
I guess it is possible that there is a tidal stream between the main two galaxies - there might even be a hint of an extension of the bigger one in that direction. I did not get anywhere near enough data to show a complete stream, but it will certainly be worth looking for next time around.
Quote:
Originally Posted by PRejto
Great image Ray!! Beautifully processed for such limited data!
I'm counting down to the arrival of my Trius! (Sadly not until November when I will bring it back from the States...)
Peter
|
Thanks Peter. It was frustrating to get enough data to show something good but not quite enough for top quality - it was worth posting the results though - this area is so interesting.
Looking forward to seeing how you go with the new cam - but November... never heard of patient amateur astronomer before
. My approach is to procrastinate on a decision for ages and then get upset if I cannot get what I eventually decide on within a couple of days.
Quote:
Originally Posted by White Rabbit
Yeah lovely star colours, they have come out well. Looks really good.
Cheers.
|
thanks Sandy
Quote:
Originally Posted by RickS
Very nice, Ray! That set up is working well. Have you tried to measure any of your results and compare them with the original spreadsheet calcs?
|
Thanks Rick.
I have not actually done a formal comparo. Did some really rough back of the envelope sensitivity tests early on and found that it all seemed to match up well enough with the design specs, so decided to just use it as is. The resolution also looks like it is close to spec and my initial guess of 2 arcsec seeing was pretty much on the money - the average good seeing has been about 2.5 FWHM with occasional bursts below 2 and as bad as 6 arcsec at times. The design spec for the final scope of 250f4 will be about right when I get it, but the current 200f4 is also not too bad a match to seeing.
I will probably publish the spreadsheet in the near future, since it has turned out to be a very valuable tool so far and could possibly be of use to others. It was informative to be able to study performance aspects of the design in quite some depth before it was built - showed where money and effort would give the best return.
Regards Ray
