IC2118 Witch head nebula

[gypsy (Mick)]

Hi all

my first go at the Witch Head Nebula
got some weird stuff happening the corners
but very happy with the result

Nikon D850
Tamron 150-600 G2
skywatcher star adventure 2i
lens at 300mm f/5.6
ISO 1600
52 subs @ 40 sec
15 x darks, flats and bias
stacked in DSS and processed in photoshop
i was struggling with the stars doing weird things decided to convert an image to starless using starnet++ to allow me to concentrate on the nebula
then blended back with the original image.

i know my way around photoshop reasonably well but
if anyone can recommend any reading on the finer arts of photoshop and bringing out the real tiny feint details in nebula i would be very happy.
i know there is more detail to be had in my photos just i haven't got the know how to tease them out

hope you like it
kind regards
Mick

[raymo]

Carry on like this and S&T won't have room for anything but readers' photos. This should be in the main forum.
raymo

[Anth10 (Anthony M)]

Mick,
You have made a very difficult target to image look easy. Great result nice contrast/ Rigel always blows out which can’t be helped other than leaving it out of the frame!
Top stuff.
Anthony

[RyanJones]

Hi Mick,

What a cracker ! Well done. A tough target done very well. I like your off square orientation too.

As far as stretching out the finer details in photoshop, have you got the arcsinh curves plug in ? If you google search for it you’ll also find some decent tutorials on its use too. It was specifically designed as an astrophotography plug in and I find it works really well.

Cheers

Ryan

[Mickoid (Michael)]

Nice one Mick! Much better than my first go at this object and better than my last go at it. I posted my last effort in the Deep Space section a few weeks ago and yours definitely deserves to be there as well. I know how tough this target is to capture so can appreciate the result you've achieved. Clever processing too, separating the nebula from the stars to do more work on the nebula and recombine the stars in later. Great job.

PS. I had a go at making a mask in PS to remove the stars and work on enhancing the nebula. I then introduced the worked nebula back into the original picture as a "Lighten" layer and this helped the contrast in my shot. Great idea inspired by what you had done. Another processing trick up the sleeve!

[gypsy (Mick)]

Hi guys
thanks for the kind comments
Raymo
I wasn’t sure whether to post in beginners or the main forum didn’t want to upset anyone
happy for admin to move if they want to
it is the first time I have pointed my camera at the witch head and most of my Astro has been wide field stuff milky way landscapes ect its only recently I been having a crack at some of the deeper space targets and most of them were not to flash, until I started using the tracker and learning how to use that was an education in itself lol

Anthony
Might have made it look easy but I assure you it wasn’t, as I said in my earlier post im no Stanger to photoshop (photography has been a hobby for 20 years)
but I would have 4 or 5 hours editing on this, I kept walking away and coming back
I wasn’t even sure I had captured any image at all until I ran a few levels and curves
could only get a really feint image until I tried separating the stars and working on the nebula on its own.

Ryan
off square orientation? do I need to crop differently or is it down to a personal preference thing? i just left it as it was imaged.
yes, I did use arcsinh I only came across it a few weeks ago so still playing around with it
I only use number 10 I find any more brightens the image to much in 1 go,

Regards
Mick

[RyanJones]

By off square I meant the witch not looking parallel to the frame. It’s all an entirely subjective thing. I just quite like the way yours is framed ( intentional or otherwise )

I find the arcsine 30 useful for an initial stretch on really feint targets and then 10s after that. Sometimes like you said I only use 10s.

The other way you can extract more feint stuff is by increasing total integration time so you can pull more signal above the noise. You can take longer subs but your DSLR will start to fight you at some point with sensor temperature and amp glow. The alternative is to take many many more subs. The down side to this is that it takes much longer to integrate and there is a deminishing return. 2 hours can have twice the SNR as 1 but it may then take 4 hours to double the SNR again.

The fact is you have got some great data with a DSLR on quite a feint target. You should be commended for getting what you have.

Ryan

[raymo]

The orientation works because the witch seems to be looking at Rigel, which
makes the witch seem slightly human.
raymo

[AdamJL]

+1 to the orientation. That works really well.

Also not sure about your starfield, I haven't seen just one corner play up like that before.

[gypsy (Mick)]

Originally Posted by Mickoid

Nice one Mick! Much better than my first go at this object and better than my last go at it. I posted my last effort in the Deep Space section a few weeks ago and yours definitely deserves to be there as well. I know how tough this target is to capture so can appreciate the result you've achieved. Clever processing too, separating the nebula from the stars to do more work on the nebula and recombine the stars in later. Great job.

PS. I had a go at making a mask in PS to remove the stars and work on enhancing the nebula. I then introduced the worked nebula back into the original picture as a "Lighten" layer and this helped the contrast in my shot. Great idea inspired by what you had done. Another processing trick up the sleeve!

mickiod
i just had a look at your witch head in deep space and compared them,
there is a lot more contrast and the witch head definatly brighter in this one glad i inspired you to try something different