Nebula NGC2074 in Ha. (click for big)
Taken on an RCOS 10" RC Scope at f9, SBIG STXL6303E Camera and PME mount at itelescopes Siding Spring Observatory.
Processed with CCDstack, Star Tools and Photoshop.
43 3nm Ha subs 40min each bin1. 28hrs total.
Before I completely butcher it with colour .
You shouldnt zoom in on it really, a bit artifacty, but looks reasonably good full frame. The hard stretch was possible with the low noise and the seeing was particularly good and still at Siding Spring for this one.
When you mention not zooming in, I wonder if ppl think "OK then im moving on right now" or zoom in straight away .
Anyway, ill pull my head in when I get more Ha and colour.
You just do this long exposure caper cause you can huh Fred? I have to agree, Butcher is probably a good verb to use here though as the variations in sharpening and smoothing are pretty obvious across the frame and the blacks looked clipped and together this gives it a pretty fake look to my eye (I mean that nicely of course )...I know ya can do better, the exposure time deserve it
Oh man, love the grayscale. I'd love to see that level of zoom detail in my FSQ mosaic. Guess I'll have to go back and shoot the LMC over with a long fl scope!
Oh man, love the grayscale. I'd love to see that level of zoom detail in my FSQ mosaic. Guess I'll have to go back and shoot the LMC over with a long fl scope!
I think Fred is beating ya to it ...stitching it all together would be the daunting task id imagine ...although, I am sure you could do it John
Wow, that's a fantastic collection of eye candy. In fact, possibly the best widefield I've seen of the region.
I don't think you're getting enough credit here for resolving absolutely every single region of interest in this widefield; all the interesting bits are pin sharp, none of them blown out (they vary wildly in dynamic range!), with excellent balance of dynamic range versus their surroundings!
NGC 2084, 2079, 2083, 2078 all show extremely good detail (easily blown out or highlights lost). While NGC 2080 and 2077 along with 2074 itself and 2079 can often also be casualties. All of these survived and show exquisite detail.
The image doesn't show any clipping when I open it (not even on my phone this morning) or when I look at the histogram (nice hump with one or two levels to spare even)?
I don't see anything that's artificial either with all detail accounted for in other (narrower-field) images.
More signal, color - can't wait to see where this is going next!
Wow, that's a fantastic collection of eye candy. In fact, possibly the best widefield I've seen of the region.
I don't think you're getting enough credit here for resolving absolutely every single region of interest in this widefield; all the interesting bits are pin sharp, none of them blown out (they vary wildly in dynamic range!), with excellent balance of dynamic range versus their surroundings!
NGC 2084, 2079, 2083, 2078 all show extremely good detail (easily blown out or highlights lost). While NGC 2080 and 2077 along with 2074 itself and 2079 can often also be casualties. All of these survived and show exquisite detail.
The image doesn't show any clipping when I open it (not even on my phone this morning) or when I look at the histogram (nice hump with one or two levels to spare even)?
I don't see anything that's artificial either with all detail accounted for in other (narrower-field) images.
More signal, color - can't wait to see where this is going next!
Fred has done an amazing job here for sure Ivo but like the variations of Eta Carinae using Berts data showed us, it is probably just a matter of taste Some like lots of colour some don't, similar thing besides Fred loves frank assessments - all good
Interesting resolution in the knots. Selective sharpening is working there I think. Maybe just a tad over sharpened but you can sort that. Some detail I had not seen before in parts. Could be an interesting image when completed.
Thanks for the support Ivo, but Mike really is right about the artifacts. Details came out OK, and there is no clipping and the dynamic range is handled OK, but now in the cold light of next morning, zoomed in, the artifacts are pretty horrendous
Look, during processing it looked good full frame so I went with it, thinking ill get away with that. But I could have done better given the data, theres no excuse. Ill do it again (although Im not keen on repros, gets a bit tedious for viewers).
I actually appreciate your kick in the bum Mike, I deserved it
All good Mike, Fred. Tastes not withstanding, it's just that, as someone who's got his head buried in signal processing most of the time, the words 'artefact' and 'clipping' are like cuswords when describing data - in signal processing, one means something has been introduced that isn't there, while the other means that something destroyed part of the data. Both are (obviously) big no-nos. Besides that though, anything goes
I just love this image! I dunno... Maybe it could be a good indication for some people that if Ivo likes your image, a repro is in order?
.
.
Zoom in straight away 
)...I know ya can do better, the exposure time deserve it 
