I don't know if people are really all that interested in how I go about my imaging, or if they want to see images are works in progress. I don't know if they want to just see a finished image, but I thought this might appear interesting to some.
It's been a few months now of collecting data on this project. So far I have been collecting data on the luminance and Ha. I had to reject a heap of data because I had so many dust motes on the chamber window that I could not calibrate out with flats. After sorting through the older frames to see which ones were salvageable and then collecting some more frames I am coming to the point at which the luminance will be completed.
This luminance image is 12.5 hours. I plan on something around 20 hours or so of luminance for the finished image and then around 4 hours each for the colour. My thinking here is that I have found collecting 3-5 hours in each colour really makes processing the colour very easy and allows a liberal use of saturation without the introduction of a lot of noise. Nor do I need to do smoothing. The luminance strategy is to collect enough data to show the optical jets as clearly as possible as well as the back ground galaxies. The target is not yet transiting the zenith at dark so there is a bit more time on my side to achieve this goal; so long as the skies are clear enough through the new moon cycles.
Really nice detail, Paul! Will be interesting to see if you can pull out all 4 jets. That last one is incredibly faint.
I presume your FOV isn't any bigger than mine? (46x46 arcsec). I know someone who is looking for a slightly wider image than mine for science purposes.
It's very good as is Paul, and worth looking at from my pov.
I think you'll find a small group of us interested in the posts of images as they are being built; It's educational as well as fascinating to watch you go about creating the final product. So yeah, keep doing it
Trev
[QUOTE=Paul Haese;1217572]I don't know if people are really all that interested in how I go about my imaging, or if they want to see images are works in progress. I don't know if they want to just see a finished image, but I thought this might appear interesting to some.
all of the above paul, the more information from people like yourself to help us out the better i reckon!
pat
I agree too. It's really good that expert level astro-photographers take the time to explain the how's and whys. That's how I learn-mainly from people on this website.
Its such a great resource and I thank you Paul and everyone else who explains stuff on this site for their time and patience.
It's looking really good Paul.
look forward to the finished galaxy!
Graham
Yeah from me too, I'm sure I'm not the only one who finds it helpful to hear of others' techniques both in acquisition and processing, wins and losses.
Look forward to the end result btw, 1097 is one of my favourites
fantastic stuff there Paul, how long are the subs for the Luminance? i ask because i am surprised at how much detail you are able to pick up in the core without it being blown out.
Stunning detail there Paul. I don't recall seeing another 1097 as good as that. Love the star masses near the core. Not sure what they are but those luminous dots in a row around the core. Fascinating.
Thanks guys for your feed back. I am glad that people like to see the progress of these images and that it is seen as a learning tool.
Quote:
Originally Posted by RickS
Really nice detail, Paul! Will be interesting to see if you can pull out all 4 jets. That last one is incredibly faint.
I presume your FOV isn't any bigger than mine? (46x46 arcsec). I know someone who is looking for a slightly wider image than mine for science purposes.
Cheers,
Rick.
Thanks Rick. This is a cropped image at 100% resolution. The native resolution of the system is 34" x 51" or there abouts. The crop is obviously a little smaller. I think the resolution is 25.9" x 39.4" as cropped. That might work for them??
Quote:
Originally Posted by Somnium
fantastic stuff there Paul, how long are the subs for the Luminance? i ask because i am surprised at how much detail you are able to pick up in the core without it being blown out.
Thanks Aidan, I am doing 30 minute subs for the luminance on this project Aidan. I think I calculated that with the sensitivity of this sensor and the f8 system optimum is about 24 minutes of exposure but I like 30 minutes as a round number. The core is a little over blown but not terribly.
Quote:
Originally Posted by gregbradley
Stunning detail there Paul. I don't recall seeing another 1097 as good as that. Love the star masses near the core. Not sure what they are but those luminous dots in a row around the core. Fascinating.
Greg.
Thanks Greg, I think it is a little sharper than Martin's image but I don't know if he took that before he installed the AOX on his system. I have seen a few sharper images of this target but those were quite a lot larger than my scope and at altitude too.
As I understand it this galaxy has a super massive black hole at its core and that is sucking in material toward the core along the bar. That activity has produced a star burst event which is producing that view.
Hi Paul,
the detail in the galaxy is one of the best I've ever seen.
You must have very good seeing.
I look forward to the finished results.
Can you post a teaser Ha pic please?
Hi Paul,
the detail in the galaxy is one of the best I've ever seen.
You must have very good seeing.
I look forward to the finished results.
Can you post a teaser Ha pic please?
cheers
Allan
Sorry Allan, I don't have an image I am happy to put up yet. Only 11 subs on Ha so far. I am undecided as to whether I will in fact use the Ha. There is certainly lots of Ha to be seen but mainly on the arms.
Quote:
Originally Posted by topheart
Good on you Paul. It is great to see just fine detail. I think the AOX must be making a significant difference. Do you agree??
Cheers,
Tim
Without doubt Tim, the use of the AOX has made a significant difference to data collection. I have enjoyed the transition from traditional guiding to AO guiding. I did have to make some changes to the guide parameters to suit my system but that was not very hard. It was really a night of experimentation. The guide speeds have been moderate compared to what is achievable but the detail levels are leaps above what I was getting from traditional guiding. That said, seeing plays a very big part in that equation. I don't believe an AO should be seen as a panacea to correct for bad seeing. In fact whilst it will help to maintain good star shapes in poor seeing it cannot correct for the bad seeing in my opinion. My site gets poor seeing when there is a northerly wind current. The guide star can be seen quite blurred and dancing around madly. Stars will be round but larger than normal. The AO cannot compensate fast enough to keep the guide star in the dithered position. Detail will have a resultant blurring from normal seeing conditions. In good seeing the AOX really works a treat. So if your site does not have consistent average to good seeing, then I doubt you would see the results you might be after. You would need to make an assessment of your seeing at your site I suppose.
