A Space & astronomy forum. SpaceBanter.com

Go Back   Home » SpaceBanter.com forum » Others » Astro Pictures
Site Map Home Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

ASTRO: M22



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old April 17th 10, 02:10 AM posted to alt.binaries.pictures.astro
Rick Johnson[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3,085
Default ASTRO: M22

There seems little agreement on its size and distance. I've seen
reports of 10,400 light-years to 8,500 light-years for its distance and
200 light-years to 50 light-years for its diameter. It appears the
latter differences are due to how the edge of it is measured. Just the
star ball would give the smaller diameter, including further stars would
lead to a larger diameter. Since this one is located against the stars
of the Milky Way, how you define its "edge" is extremely difficult.
Still, the wide disagreement surprised me.

My image is rather poor. This object is located at about -24 degrees.
My seeing goes to pot about -15 degrees. I finally had an extremely
good night so gave it a try. At higher declinations stars were about 2"
of arc in size or smaller in some cases but down low it was about 3.25".
Far worse than I normally would process but likely the best I'll do
from this location.

I'd hoped to see the planetary but only its central star shows. The
nebula is lost in the large size of about 7" of the central star. It
just won't show at my latitude, too much atmosphere to distort the
image. It might show in an OIII image but I don't have that filter. It
contains no hydrogen so H alpha is useless on this planetary. It's also
strong in IR but my sensor has little IR sensitivity so that doesn't
help either.

Stars are rather elongated due to atmospheric refraction. This low I
really need to use a pseudo lum image made from the RGB frames aligned
to eliminate the chromatic refraction of our atmosphere this low. I did
do that for the RGB part of this image. This resulted in smaller stars
in the RGB image even though they were taken at 1.5" per pixel than I
had in the luminosity image at 1" per pixel. But I took too few and too
short RGB images to get a sufficient signal to noise ratio to use these
as a pseudo luminosity image. I may go that route if I ever get a good
enough night. Actually it would take nights as I can only image this
one for about 2 hours at best thanks to my Meridian Tree being in the
way. I have an hour or so on either side of the tree before it gets so
low seeing is really awful. If I could cut down the tree (that's
illegal) I'd have nearly 4 hours of image time a night not 2 and those
additional hours would be in the best seeing. Where are those beavers
anyway?

14" LX200R @ f/10, L=6x5', RGB=2x10', 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".

Attached Thumbnails
Click image for larger version

Name:	M22L6X5RGB2X10X3R.jpg
Views:	391
Size:	824.6 KB
ID:	2894  
  #2  
Old April 21st 10, 08:33 PM posted to alt.binaries.pictures.astro
Stefan Lilge
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,269
Default ASTRO: M22

Rick,

very good result for such a low object. I would probably consider to image a
HII region that low with a short focal length, but a globular is very
difficult in the "bad seeing zone".

Stefan

"Rick Johnson" schrieb im Newsbeitrag
. com...
There seems little agreement on its size and distance. I've seen
reports of 10,400 light-years to 8,500 light-years for its distance and
200 light-years to 50 light-years for its diameter. It appears the
latter differences are due to how the edge of it is measured. Just the
star ball would give the smaller diameter, including further stars would
lead to a larger diameter. Since this one is located against the stars
of the Milky Way, how you define its "edge" is extremely difficult.
Still, the wide disagreement surprised me.

My image is rather poor. This object is located at about -24 degrees.
My seeing goes to pot about -15 degrees. I finally had an extremely
good night so gave it a try. At higher declinations stars were about 2"
of arc in size or smaller in some cases but down low it was about 3.25".
Far worse than I normally would process but likely the best I'll do
from this location.

I'd hoped to see the planetary but only its central star shows. The
nebula is lost in the large size of about 7" of the central star. It
just won't show at my latitude, too much atmosphere to distort the
image. It might show in an OIII image but I don't have that filter. It
contains no hydrogen so H alpha is useless on this planetary. It's also
strong in IR but my sensor has little IR sensitivity so that doesn't
help either.

Stars are rather elongated due to atmospheric refraction. This low I
really need to use a pseudo lum image made from the RGB frames aligned
to eliminate the chromatic refraction of our atmosphere this low. I did
do that for the RGB part of this image. This resulted in smaller stars
in the RGB image even though they were taken at 1.5" per pixel than I
had in the luminosity image at 1" per pixel. But I took too few and too
short RGB images to get a sufficient signal to noise ratio to use these
as a pseudo luminosity image. I may go that route if I ever get a good
enough night. Actually it would take nights as I can only image this
one for about 2 hours at best thanks to my Meridian Tree being in the
way. I have an hour or so on either side of the tree before it gets so
low seeing is really awful. If I could cut down the tree (that's
illegal) I'd have nearly 4 hours of image time a night not 2 and those
additional hours would be in the best seeing. Where are those beavers
anyway?

14" LX200R @ f/10, L=6x5', RGB=2x10', 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".



  #3  
Old April 22nd 10, 07:49 PM posted to alt.binaries.pictures.astro
Rick Johnson[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3,085
Default ASTRO: M22

It took me 5 years to have a night I could do this. Rather rare event.
I need a really super dry day with a north wind to keep the gunk layer
from forming over the lake. Then seeing has to be super. Not common
with wind here. Wind seems to mix the air too much creating horrid fast
seeing so you can't begin to find a focus but this night was the
exception. Still that low red and blue didn't line up with green and
even Registar couldn't handle it very well. I should have taken more
RGB frames at normal binning and ignored L since it just couldn't handle
the prism effect of the atmosphere. If I ever can try again I'll know
better.

Rick

On 4/21/2010 2:33 PM, Stefan Lilge wrote:
Rick,

very good result for such a low object. I would probably consider to image a
HII region that low with a short focal length, but a globular is very
difficult in the "bad seeing zone".

Stefan

"Rick schrieb im Newsbeitrag
. com...
There seems little agreement on its size and distance. I've seen
reports of 10,400 light-years to 8,500 light-years for its distance and
200 light-years to 50 light-years for its diameter. It appears the
latter differences are due to how the edge of it is measured. Just the
star ball would give the smaller diameter, including further stars would
lead to a larger diameter. Since this one is located against the stars
of the Milky Way, how you define its "edge" is extremely difficult.
Still, the wide disagreement surprised me.

My image is rather poor. This object is located at about -24 degrees.
My seeing goes to pot about -15 degrees. I finally had an extremely
good night so gave it a try. At higher declinations stars were about 2"
of arc in size or smaller in some cases but down low it was about 3.25".
Far worse than I normally would process but likely the best I'll do
from this location.

I'd hoped to see the planetary but only its central star shows. The
nebula is lost in the large size of about 7" of the central star. It
just won't show at my latitude, too much atmosphere to distort the
image. It might show in an OIII image but I don't have that filter. It
contains no hydrogen so H alpha is useless on this planetary. It's also
strong in IR but my sensor has little IR sensitivity so that doesn't
help either.

Stars are rather elongated due to atmospheric refraction. This low I
really need to use a pseudo lum image made from the RGB frames aligned
to eliminate the chromatic refraction of our atmosphere this low. I did
do that for the RGB part of this image. This resulted in smaller stars
in the RGB image even though they were taken at 1.5" per pixel than I
had in the luminosity image at 1" per pixel. But I took too few and too
short RGB images to get a sufficient signal to noise ratio to use these
as a pseudo luminosity image. I may go that route if I ever get a good
enough night. Actually it would take nights as I can only image this
one for about 2 hours at best thanks to my Meridian Tree being in the
way. I have an hour or so on either side of the tree before it gets so
low seeing is really awful. If I could cut down the tree (that's
illegal) I'd have nearly 4 hours of image time a night not 2 and those
additional hours would be in the best seeing. Where are those beavers
anyway?

14" LX200R @ f/10, L=6x5', RGB=2x10', 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".


 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
[sci.astro,sci.astro.seti] Contents (Astronomy Frequently Asked Questions) (0/9) [email protected] SETI 0 August 15th 07 09:36 PM
[sci.astro,sci.astro.seti] Contents (Astronomy Frequently Asked Questions) (0/9) [email protected] Astronomy Misc 0 May 3rd 06 12:33 PM
[sci.astro,sci.astro.seti] Contents (Astronomy Frequently Asked Questions) (0/9) [email protected] SETI 0 May 3rd 06 12:33 PM
[sci.astro,sci.astro.seti] Contents (Astronomy Frequently Asked Questions) (0/9) [email protected] Astronomy Misc 0 October 6th 05 02:34 AM
[sci.astro,sci.astro.seti] Contents (Astronomy Frequently Asked Questions) (0/9) [email protected] Astronomy Misc 0 September 30th 04 02:23 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 02:04 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 SpaceBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.