ASTRO: M101 large download 4006x2672 Right image this time

Dang, I grabbed the wrong file. The one I posted had new bad column I
didn't see until last night. Sorry for the mix-up.
Rick
______________

I've been playing with this one for 2 weeks now. Time to give up. When
I reduced the file size I lost detail, especially the HII regions so I
left it full size. First time I've posted a full frame, full size
STL-11000 image. If it is too much let me know and I'll post a half
size version.

Much of the data for this was taken the same night as NGC 2805 with the
observatory lights on so it had the same gradient problem. In fact I
took this first waiting for NGC 2805 to get out of some trees that block
a couple hours either side of the meridian near the pole. They keep a
ton of snow off the observatory roof or else I'd cut them down.

Even though the STL-11000's frame is 35mm size the whole galaxy didn't
fit on it. I should have moved it farther west (right) but I saw that
little galaxy over there and didn't see that M101 was going off frame to
the east so framed it to pick up that western galaxy. It wasn't until I
stacked the images and removed the gradient I realized I shouldn't have
done that. Top and bottom are also both cut off as well though I knew
that was happening. This is one tore up galaxy. Getting the faint
stuff without blowing out the nucleus was difficult and resulted in a
flatter image than I'd like. My processing skills have a ways to go
yet. Still I like how it turned out.

14" LX200R@F/10, L=6x20' binned 1x1 RGB=2x10' binned 2x2, STL-11000XM,
Paramount ME


Rick
--
Correct domain name is arvig and it is net not com. Prefix is correct.
Third character is a zero rather than a capital "Oh".

It's a great target for your FOV and you have fine detail.

--
Regards, Doug W.
www.photonsfate.com
--
"Rick Johnson" wrote in message
...
Dang, I grabbed the wrong file. The one I posted had new bad column I
didn't see until last night. Sorry for the mix-up.
Rick
______________

I've been playing with this one for 2 weeks now. Time to give up. When
I reduced the file size I lost detail, especially the HII regions so I
left it full size. First time I've posted a full frame, full size
STL-11000 image. If it is too much let me know and I'll post a half
size version.

Much of the data for this was taken the same night as NGC 2805 with the
observatory lights on so it had the same gradient problem. In fact I
took this first waiting for NGC 2805 to get out of some trees that block
a couple hours either side of the meridian near the pole. They keep a
ton of snow off the observatory roof or else I'd cut them down.

Even though the STL-11000's frame is 35mm size the whole galaxy didn't
fit on it. I should have moved it farther west (right) but I saw that
little galaxy over there and didn't see that M101 was going off frame to
the east so framed it to pick up that western galaxy. It wasn't until I
stacked the images and removed the gradient I realized I shouldn't have
done that. Top and bottom are also both cut off as well though I knew
that was happening. This is one tore up galaxy. Getting the faint
stuff without blowing out the nucleus was difficult and resulted in a
flatter image than I'd like. My processing skills have a ways to go
yet. Still I like how it turned out.

14" LX200R@F/10, L=6x20' binned 1x1 RGB=2x10' binned 2x2, STL-11000XM,
Paramount ME


Rick
--
Correct domain name is arvig and it is net not com. Prefix is correct.
Third character is a zero rather than a capital "Oh".

Doug W. wrote:

It's a great target for your FOV and you have fine detail.


Thanks. Not up to your standards but I'm getting there. First
reasonable seeing I've had this year.

So far I've gotten three emails and one post asking where the image is
so apparently some servers picked up the text message but not the image
itself. I don't know if size was the reason or just the way Usenet hiccups.

Rick

Awesome image Rick! Well I downloaded it and reprocessed the image so I
could see the whole image at once...and well it is pretty amazing how hubble
like it looks. You got a nice system that seems to be working well for you.
Well its cloudy here so I am still scouring the hard drive and reprocessing
older images.

Joe


"Rick Johnson" wrote in message
...
Dang, I grabbed the wrong file. The one I posted had new bad column I
didn't see until last night. Sorry for the mix-up.
Rick
______________

I've been playing with this one for 2 weeks now. Time to give up. When
I reduced the file size I lost detail, especially the HII regions so I
left it full size. First time I've posted a full frame, full size
STL-11000 image. If it is too much let me know and I'll post a half
size version.

Much of the data for this was taken the same night as NGC 2805 with the
observatory lights on so it had the same gradient problem. In fact I
took this first waiting for NGC 2805 to get out of some trees that block
a couple hours either side of the meridian near the pole. They keep a
ton of snow off the observatory roof or else I'd cut them down.

Even though the STL-11000's frame is 35mm size the whole galaxy didn't
fit on it. I should have moved it farther west (right) but I saw that
little galaxy over there and didn't see that M101 was going off frame to
the east so framed it to pick up that western galaxy. It wasn't until I
stacked the images and removed the gradient I realized I shouldn't have
done that. Top and bottom are also both cut off as well though I knew
that was happening. This is one tore up galaxy. Getting the faint
stuff without blowing out the nucleus was difficult and resulted in a
flatter image than I'd like. My processing skills have a ways to go
yet. Still I like how it turned out.

14" LX200R@F/10, L=6x20' binned 1x1 RGB=2x10' binned 2x2, STL-11000XM,
Paramount ME


Rick
--
Correct domain name is arvig and it is net not com. Prefix is correct.
Third character is a zero rather than a capital "Oh".





----------------------------------------------------------------------------
----

My monitor has very small pixels at about 2000x1450 resolution
(approximate -- 22" LCD). When I downsized it to even 75%, let alone
50% all but the large HII regions became stars and much of the faint
detail at the left and top of the screen vanished. Even
http://www.usenet-replayer.com/webrings/astro.html only picked up the
50% version though it has picked up the 75% size in the past. Seems
that's as big as I dare go on Usenet and the normal 50% (seeing usually
dictates that size) the best to reach everyone. My ISP doesn't offer
webspace to individuals, only those with commercial accounts and they
have virtually none of those. Besides, I know nothing about creating a
web page so guess I'm stuck for now.

There's a bright knot just out of frame at the top. I tried to get it
in frame but then the bottom arm of the galaxy was out of frame so I
gave up. There's a nice companion galaxy just out of frame to the left
(east) as well I'd have liked to have had in frame but that didn't work
either. Since the chip already sees nearly the full usable field of the
scope a reducer wouldn't help either, the vignetting would have been too
severe to flat field effectively. A 10" or maybe 12" version of the
scope would do a better job on this guy.

I have a couple of mined images I'll be posting. I was sure I had found
all of them but came up with two I'd taken in both LRGB and H-alpha. I
posted one of those versions but then forgot about the other. I'm
having trouble with the color in the Bubble as part is somewhat blue
(brightest parts) and part pink, no web shot I find does that, just me.
I don't understand why but must be something I'm doing wrong. Most
web shots show the bubble as red though a few have it sort of blue but
no one has it half and half like mine's coming out. The background
older bubbles are the right color of reddish pink. So why's the bubble
itself screwy? If anyone with color experience has an idea let me know.

Rick


J McBride wrote:

Awesome image Rick! Well I downloaded it and reprocessed the image so I
could see the whole image at once...and well it is pretty amazing how hubble
like it looks. You got a nice system that seems to be working well for you.
Well its cloudy here so I am still scouring the hard drive and reprocessing
older images.

Joe


"Rick Johnson" wrote in message
...

Dang, I grabbed the wrong file. The one I posted had new bad column I
didn't see until last night. Sorry for the mix-up.
Rick
______________

I've been playing with this one for 2 weeks now. Time to give up. When
I reduced the file size I lost detail, especially the HII regions so I
left it full size. First time I've posted a full frame, full size
STL-11000 image. If it is too much let me know and I'll post a half
size version.

Much of the data for this was taken the same night as NGC 2805 with the
observatory lights on so it had the same gradient problem. In fact I
took this first waiting for NGC 2805 to get out of some trees that block
a couple hours either side of the meridian near the pole. They keep a
ton of snow off the observatory roof or else I'd cut them down.

Even though the STL-11000's frame is 35mm size the whole galaxy didn't
fit on it. I should have moved it farther west (right) but I saw that
little galaxy over there and didn't see that M101 was going off frame to
the east so framed it to pick up that western galaxy. It wasn't until I
stacked the images and removed the gradient I realized I shouldn't have
done that. Top and bottom are also both cut off as well though I knew
that was happening. This is one tore up galaxy. Getting the faint
stuff without blowing out the nucleus was difficult and resulted in a
flatter image than I'd like. My processing skills have a ways to go
yet. Still I like how it turned out.

14" LX200R@F/10, L=6x20' binned 1x1 RGB=2x10' binned 2x2, STL-11000XM,
Paramount ME


Rick
--

J McBride wrote:
and well it is pretty amazing how hubble
like it looks.
Joe

For the real Hubble shot see:
http://imgsrc.hubblesite.org/hu/db/2.../hires_jpg.jpg
(9.5 meg download) There is one 6 times that size if you really want
to be impressed.
http://imgsrc.hubblesite.org/hu/db/2...s/full_jpg.jpg

All the pink HII regions in my shot are blue balls of super hot stars in
the Hubble shot with no Hydrogen emission Alpha or Beta visible.
Apparently they use narrow band filters to make the image that didn't
include HII in the passbands. I don't think Hubble has much to worry
about concerning competion from me! But it is fun to compare the two.

Rick

My server missed the post, but that is more the norm than the exception
unfortunately.

Stefan

"Rick Johnson" schrieb im Newsbeitrag
...


Doug W. wrote:

It's a great target for your FOV and you have fine detail.


Thanks. Not up to your standards but I'm getting there. First reasonable
seeing I've had this year.

So far I've gotten three emails and one post asking where the image is so
apparently some servers picked up the text message but not the image
itself. I don't know if size was the reason or just the way Usenet
hiccups.

Rick