Wow that was a big processing job - combining the original LRGB PiS image with a newly processed HaSIIOIII narrowband image. Pretty much went at this on my own, but referenced the more prominent recent images very early on. After working the usual magic with selective colour and curves adjustment in PI, I was very surprised to see the similarity in colour to Andy's great version.
But alas, this first attempt by me is only 13.25 hrs compared to 30, and the camera's only a cheapie too, so I"m noticing some lack of detail in some areas. But I'm generally very happy!
And really pleased at my new workflow that lets me combine nice colourful RGB stars with the NB data.
The nebulosity looks good Simon
Many of the stars look a bit strange, blown out cores. On the top left corner there are some strange squiggles, no idea what they are!
Hey thanks for the peeping Colin. I'll review my removal of the Ha filter artefacts causing the star appearance. Not sure about the squiggles, can't see any myself, can you pm me an excerpt?
The nebulosity looks good Simon
Many of the stars look a bit strange, blown out cores. On the top left corner there are some strange squiggles, no idea what they are!
Since you mentioned it i had to look. Short faint wisps or squiggles - I think they might be tiny strips (lines & curves) of unresolved (tiny) stars - a whole lot of dots in a row (curve or line) if you will. Check the charts- maybe even a galaxy side on, although some curved???) It is amazing how many stars in a row one sees in this part of the heavens !
Yay, was imaging last night, first time after collimating the Tak. It worked! Stars far rounder. Damn, so I need to redo all my targets from the last 5 months....
Well, the details in the bright areas (highlights) within the chickens bum region have gotten a bit away form you there Simon....but overall, it's a good lucking and quite striking image. Always good to see the entire running chicken too.. balk begurk!
really good looking view Simon - maybe some minor quibbles with star shapes (already fixed?) but still impressive
If the star shapes over the last 5 moths are a problem, StarTools has a really effective tool for tidying them up - not perfect, but does a really good job nonetheless.
Thanks for the comments and input folks. Been busy so no time yet to revisit.
Rick, where do you notice the posterisation? The core? Just want to know so I can think of any fix. But alas I saw some raw subs from a friend's QSI683, it's far smoother and more detailed than my same sub. The cam is definitely a beginner's cam.
Ray, I've used startools before, yes it does seem to work magic, but can also effect the neb detail a bit. I'll give it another go thanks to your suggestion! Stars aren't that distracting for me tho, only affects the pixel peepers.
Mike, re my top comment about comparing the QSI camera, the Ha subs are far more subtle than my cam's. I think I'm pushing the limits of the thing, and won't let it limit me in a year. Am waiting for my friend to send me an OIII sub to compare, expecting that to be even more telling.
Rick, where do you notice the posterisation? The core? Just want to know so I can think of any fix. But alas I saw some raw subs from a friend's QSI683, it's far smoother and more detailed than my same sub. The cam is definitely a beginner's cam.
The blue/pink area at the bottom right is a good example. There's less fine detail than I'd expect. Guess it could be the data and not the processing...
Simmo, I've emailed you a few subs of my running chicken image from my QSI camera - it will be interesting to get your thoughts on the comparison between these cameras, on the same target, with fast widefield scopes, although they are of differing configurations.
(My 70mm refractor vs.your Tak 130 newt.)
I suspect you get you what you pay for but lets allow the evidence speak for itself.
Have you compared images after you've played with and fixed the collimation on your Tak? Collimation doesn't just effect the stars but also messes with fine details making them appear washed out (as they're also not correctly resolved). Being at F/3.3, it is quite critical.
You may be able to fix star shapes with collimation not being perfect but it will most definitely effect resolution and fine detail.
I have to admit, this is one of the very few images of the region that I can actually see a chicken!
Yes Andy, as mentioned I had a late shift so haven't been able to do the full comparison yet. How long are your subs? Thats important, as my friend is currently doing the same length as me, 15 mins. If you could do some 15's that's give even better data. Thanks for sending the files too!
I will produce some 'blinked' and star aligned comparisons and assuming that the comparisons favour your 683, I tell you I'm gonna send the comparisons to QSI themselves, as we need to help them out. I hear their sales are suffering due to the newer cams. Very few ppl in the world are imaging at 15 mins, so I may be exposing the cam's limitations. I've imaged from 3secs to 300 to 600 as well as 900. The cam is not magic, it needs longer subs to match it with you deep imagers.
Colin, good idea, might try some new subs soon. In fact tonight!
Yes I tried fixing stars in Startools, but alas that repair function wrecks my nice diffraction spikes and more importantly does damage some neb detail.
I know what you are saying re collimation and neb detail, but the raw images do show some pretty nice detail. But the OIII for example, there's massive loss of signal in mine compared to Andy's, just white blobs compared to lovely whispy bits (near the chooks bum, as Mike scientifically noted!). That can't be caused by slightly off collimation.
I know this is an obvious question but what filter are you using and are they parfocal?
How much temp differences are there between each filter?
Just wondering out loud....
