Mike Lewis
Staff Member
So here is a set of 2 images, made from the same data set, of the Cone Nebula (NGC 2264) and the Christmas Tree Cluster. I first processed the data and get a more conventional SHO result, but I had wanted to try to use my narrowband data to get a more 'natural' looking color mix, so I ran through again and got something that looks more like an RGB capture (or perhaps an HOO mix), even though it is made from all 3 narrowband signals. I am very interested on any opinions of which version is preferred, as I am having trouble picking my own favorite out of these 2.
This is also the first time I took significantly more Oiii data than either of the 2 other narrowband channels. The total integration time shown here is about 19 hours and 30 minutes, but I did have to throw out some bad data accounting for about a fourth of 26 hours and 45 minutes of integration time that was originally collected. The remaining data did come together well though and my only issue in the post processing after culling the data was to decide on which of the many color palettes I was going to use. These are the 2 I liked enough to pursue the post processing until a final image was created. Which one do you like the best and why?
The Cone Nebula is a star forming region in the constellation Monoceros thought to be about 2,500 light years distant.
SHO Version
More RGB-Like Version
Thanks for looking!
Capture Details:
Equipment:
QHY268M Camera @ -5C and
Gain:56 Offset:25 / Gain:0 Offset 25
Software Bisque MyT Mount
Stellarvue SVQ100 Astrograph Refractor, 580mm @ f/5.8
Antlia Pro Filters (3nm narrowband plus LRGB)
QHY OAG-M/ASI290MM
Software:
Pixinsight Commercial Version 1.8
Lightroom CC
Photoshop CC
N.I.N.A. Control Software
BlurXTerminator (Russell Croman)
StarXTerminator (Russell Croman)
NoiseXTerminator (Russell Croman)
Light Frames:
Gain 56 / Offset 25
Ha: 26 x 600 secs (4 hrs 20 mins)
OIII: 59 x 600 secs (9 hrs 50 mins)
SII: 30 x 600 secs (5 hrs)
Gain 0 / Offset 25
Red: 14 x 30 secs (7 mins)
Green: 15 x 30 secs (7 mins 30 secs)
Blue: 12 x 30 secs (6 mins)
19 hrs 30 mins 30 secs total
Dark Frames:
10 x 30 secs (5 mins)
10 x 600 secs (1 hr 40 mins)
ML
This is also the first time I took significantly more Oiii data than either of the 2 other narrowband channels. The total integration time shown here is about 19 hours and 30 minutes, but I did have to throw out some bad data accounting for about a fourth of 26 hours and 45 minutes of integration time that was originally collected. The remaining data did come together well though and my only issue in the post processing after culling the data was to decide on which of the many color palettes I was going to use. These are the 2 I liked enough to pursue the post processing until a final image was created. Which one do you like the best and why?
The Cone Nebula is a star forming region in the constellation Monoceros thought to be about 2,500 light years distant.
SHO Version
More RGB-Like Version
Thanks for looking!
Capture Details:
Equipment:
QHY268M Camera @ -5C and
Gain:56 Offset:25 / Gain:0 Offset 25
Software Bisque MyT Mount
Stellarvue SVQ100 Astrograph Refractor, 580mm @ f/5.8
Antlia Pro Filters (3nm narrowband plus LRGB)
QHY OAG-M/ASI290MM
Software:
Pixinsight Commercial Version 1.8
Lightroom CC
Photoshop CC
N.I.N.A. Control Software
BlurXTerminator (Russell Croman)
StarXTerminator (Russell Croman)
NoiseXTerminator (Russell Croman)
Light Frames:
Gain 56 / Offset 25
Ha: 26 x 600 secs (4 hrs 20 mins)
OIII: 59 x 600 secs (9 hrs 50 mins)
SII: 30 x 600 secs (5 hrs)
Gain 0 / Offset 25
Red: 14 x 30 secs (7 mins)
Green: 15 x 30 secs (7 mins 30 secs)
Blue: 12 x 30 secs (6 mins)
19 hrs 30 mins 30 secs total
Dark Frames:
10 x 30 secs (5 mins)
10 x 600 secs (1 hr 40 mins)
ML
Last edited:
