NGC 2264 - The Christmas Tree Cluster

[chris_g]

Taken over two nights, 88 total subs at 180 seconds.

sub 88 at 180, 20 dark, 20 flat, 20 dark flat and 20 bias.

Gear. EQ6-R, ED80, T2i, L-Pro
Process: DSS, PS, Star Spikes Pro

Now why would I take so many subs if it's just a star cluster? It's not, there's also a couple of nebulae there, the Cone Nebula and the Fox Fur Nebula, but they're feint, and I don't have enough data to do them justice.

NGC 2264 - the Cone Nebula, and the Christmas Tree Cluster. Two other objects are within this designation but not officially included, the Snowflake Cluster, and the Fox Fur Nebula. All of the objects are located in the Monoceros constellation and are located about 720 parsecs or 2,300 light-years from Earth. Due to its relative proximity and large size, it is extremely well studied. NGC 2264 is sometimes referred to as the Christmas Tree Cluster and the Cone Nebula. However, the designation of NGC 2264 in the New General Catalogue refers to both objects and not the cluster alone.

Comments, good, bad and indifferent are welcome. And as always, what you see is what you get, thanks for looking!

Clear Skies!

[messier 111]

very nicely done , thx .

ps , love that part . Comments, good, bad and indifferent are welcome.

[Jockinireland]

Hi Chris. If you have 88 x 180s (4 hrs +) there simply must be more in that image to bring out.

Are you sure it's stacked correctly and what have you done in processing it.

[chris_g]

Hi Chris. If you have 88 x 180s (4 hrs +) there simply must be more in that image to bring out.

Are you sure it's stacked correctly and what have you done in processing it.

They're there, what I got was just plain ugly.

This is what StarExterminator got out of it. I just don't have enough data to pull it all out

[Jockinireland]

Hi Chris, I think with some judicious processing we could get a reasonable Christmas tree and cone out of that. If you'd like to share the raw stack I could have a go at it.

[bobharmony]

Hi Chris, I think with some judicious processing we could get a reasonable Christmas tree and cone out of that. If you'd like to share the raw stack I could have a go at it.

I agree, there is most likely some good data hiding in there. The image in the first post looked a bit artificial and clipped to my eye. The subsequent ones hint at good data to be brought out. Maybe you would consider offering up the data for one of the monthly challenges. You might be surprised what can be pulled out.

Bob

[chris_g]

@Jockinireland

The one called autosave, anyone is welcome to see what they can get out of it

https://1drv.ms/u/s!ArTUOFX8EnYdlVWDzXo ... a?e=XRZwHk

[SkyHiker]

Ditto what JII and Bob said. If you clean up that starXterminator image by selecting the nebulosity and fold in the stars, that will make it nicer than it is already. I like your original image, but the background is unnaturally dark maybe because you wanted to make it look clean. If you mix the two and make the stars a bit less saturated, I think it would look more natural. BTW I see that the starXterminator is also produces artifacts, thanks for showing.

[chris_g]

Ditto what JII and Bob said. If you clean up that starXterminator image by selecting the nebulosity and fold in the stars, that will make it nicer than it is already. I like your original image, but the background is unnaturally dark maybe because you wanted to make it look clean. If you mix the two and make the stars a bit less saturated, I think it would look more natural. BTW I see that the starXterminator is also produces artifacts, thanks for showing.

Star Exterminator was a lot cleaner than Starnet version and it's a lot faster too. It also integrates into PS very nicely. I don't know if your older machine would get the speed increase though, it's dependent on the CPU from what I understand of it.

[chris_g]

Hi Chris, I think with some judicious processing we could get a reasonable Christmas tree and cone out of that. If you'd like to share the raw stack I could have a go at it.

I agree, there is most likely some good data hiding in there. The image in the first post looked a bit artificial and clipped to my eye. The subsequent ones hint at good data to be brought out. Maybe you would consider offering up the data for one of the monthly challenges. You might be surprised what can be pulled out.

Bob

How would I go about offering data for an AP challenge, that sounds like it would be a blast getting to see what a whole bunch of people do with my data.

[chris_g]

@SkyHiker


Star Net

[Jockinireland]

Hi Chris, I think with some judicious processing we could get a reasonable Christmas tree and cone out of that. If you'd like to share the raw stack I could have a go at it.

I agree, there is most likely some good data hiding in there. The image in the first post looked a bit artificial and clipped to my eye. The subsequent ones hint at good data to be brought out. Maybe you would consider offering up the data for one of the monthly challenges. You might be surprised what can be pulled out.

Bob

How would I go about offering data for an AP challenge, that sounds like it would be a blast getting to see what a whole bunch of people do with my data.

Thats easy! Put the file(s) you want to share into a folder as you have done with the autosave above them PM a link to me and I'll take it from there.

As it happens I'll be putting out the begging bowl for more data soon anyway.

I've downloaded your file and will take a look at it after dinner.

[Jockinireland]

hi Chris,

Here y'go. I tried in PS first but I'm so rusty in it I was not getting anywhere. So this is in PI. The key truned out to be doing deconvolution and noise reduction before doing Starxterminator - still in linear. then stretch the starless, normal colour, and contrast adjustments then stretching the stars minimally before adding back in. Giving this;

I'm sure it could be refined more - for example stretching the R & B channels seperately then recombining as HOO (since this is l-enhance date) and some final noise reduction may help. maybe seperate out the Ha and put it in as a Lum layer.

The only problem with the data is really the stars. They are quite bloated and many are saturated which surprises me when you have 180s, with your 600d and the L-enhance. What ISO did you use.

Anyway, i hope this is of some value to you.

take care

David.

[chris_g]

hi Chris,

Here y'go. I tried in PS first but I'm so rusty in it I was not getting anywhere. So this is in PI. The key truned out to be doing deconvolution and noise reduction before doing Starxterminator - still in linear. then stretch the starless, normal colour, and contrast adjustments then stretching the stars minimally before adding back in. Giving this;



I'm sure it could be refined more - for example stretching the R & B channels seperately then recombining as HOO (since this is l-enhance date) and some final noise reduction may help. maybe seperate out the Ha and put it in as a Lum layer.

The only problem with the data is really the stars. They are quite bloated and many are saturated which surprises me when you have 180s, with your 600d and the L-enhance. What ISO did you use.

Anyway, i hope this is of some value to you.

take care

David.

Definitely better than I got out of it, my skills have a long way to go in that regard. But there's still a lot of noise that more data will help get rid of, I have another clear night tonight, and I hope to add at least another 4 hours. Hope to be able to clear up the upper right corner of the data.

800 ISO the framing was off by about 2 degrees between the two nights. Don't know if the stack would make them to be bloated or not. I've also been having issues with that camera, sensor keeps getting junk on it, you'll sae that in the lower left corner. I clean it, put the APSC L-Pro clip, take about 7 or 8 images, perfect, then that just dropped on, like a fly, gggrrr, I wanted to swat it!

[Jockinireland]

Hi Chris,

While more data will always help, your image is not really that noisy - I've seen a LOT worse. I think whats going on at top right is that the starfield is very dense and the stars are big (even the small ones!) and not great shapes (possibly tilt or backspacing). Thats confusing starnet/starXterminator and is why you have so much white stuff going on in both your starless images. This is my starless using SX after deconvolution and noise reduction.

If it was me, I'd be trying to resolve the star issue - at 180s, ISO800 and l-eNhance they really should not be as big and bright. I'd look at;

Focus, I think that the stars are slightly out of focus - that would also explain why the features in the nebula are not too sharp. Do you use a bahtinov mask?
Guiding - take a look at your PHD2 log and see what the guiding looks like for the two sessions. The stars are fairly round (in the middle anyway) but if guiding was not so good but Dec and RA errors were the same, that could result in bloated stars. But my money would be on focus.

On your dust spots generating during imaging, I had the same problem with my 700D because of the automatic sensor cleaning (I know your 550D has this too) which was being done between images. I'd have dust spots appearing or moving through the imaging session and therefore not being removed by flats. I think this is because the automatic sensor cleaning is not really designed for situations where the camera is pointing upwards, it shakes the sensor relying on gravity to pull the dust off the sensor. If the camera is pointed at Zenith the dust just moves randomly around the sensor. I solved the problem by turning off auto sensor cleaning.

Hope this helps

Take care

David.

[chris_g]

Hi Chris,

While more data will always help, your image is not really that noisy - I've seen a LOT worse. I think whats going on at top right is that the starfield is very dense and the stars are big (even the small ones!) and not great shapes (possibly tilt or backspacing). Thats confusing starnet/starXterminator and is why you have so much white stuff going on in both your starless images. This is my starless using SX after deconvolution and noise reduction.




If it was me, I'd be trying to resolve the star issue - at 180s, ISO800 and l-eNhance they really should not be as big and bright. I'd look at;

Focus, I think that the stars are slightly out of focus - that would also explain why the features in the nebula are not too sharp. Do you use a bahtinov mask?
Guiding - take a look at your PHD2 log and see what the guiding looks like for the two sessions. The stars are fairly round (in the middle anyway) but if guiding was not so good but Dec and RA errors were the same, that could result in bloated stars. But my money would be on focus.

On your dust spots generating during imaging, I had the same problem with my 700D because of the automatic sensor cleaning (I know your 550D has this too) which was being done between images. I'd have dust spots appearing or moving through the imaging session and therefore not being removed by flats. I think this is because the automatic sensor cleaning is not really designed for situations where the camera is pointing upwards, it shakes the sensor relying on gravity to pull the dust off the sensor. If the camera is pointed at Zenith the dust just moves randomly around the sensor. I solved the problem by turning off auto sensor cleaning.

Hope this helps

Take care

David.

Always helps,

The 550D doesn't do automatic cleaning, it's been removed to make the camera full spectrum. it's clean then suddenly it drops something, annoying to say the least. So far everything has been able to be fixed in post processing. I added another 5 hours of data last night, no dust bunnies this time. I'm going to work it more Indepth tonight, but Star Exterminator is already giving me a much cleaner output. And after seeing yours, I know I can get it that much better. I have been focusing using HFD. I'll start using the Bahtinov mask again.

[Jockinireland]

I know people swear by the focus aid routines in APT - i just cant get them to give me a good reliable result, I think my seeing is just too bad. So I use the bahtinov mask but rather than use the bahtinov aid, I just centre on a bright star, and take repetitive 5 second images adjusting each time. usually takes me 2-3 minutes and that works best for me.

[chris_g]

I know people swear by the focus aid routines in APT - i just cant get them to give me a good reliable result, I think my seeing is just too bad. So I use the bahtinov mask but rather than use the bahtinov aid, I just centre on a bright star, and take repetitive 5 second images adjusting each time. usually takes me 2-3 minutes and that works best for me.

I do the same with either HFD or the Bahtinov mask. I tried setting it up as soon as DSLR support came out in 3.9 but didn't look good and I haven't wanted to use valuable imaging time figuring it out

[Ylem]

Taken over two nights, 88 total subs at 180 seconds.

sub 88 at 180, 20 dark, 20 flat, 20 dark flat and 20 bias.

Gear. EQ6-R, ED80, T2i, L-Pro
Process: DSS, PS, Star Spikes Pro

Now why would I take so many subs if it's just a star cluster? It's not, there's also a couple of nebulae there, the Cone Nebula and the Fox Fur Nebula, but they're feint, and I don't have enough data to do them justice.

NGC 2264 - the Cone Nebula, and the Christmas Tree Cluster. Two other objects are within this designation but not officially included, the Snowflake Cluster, and the Fox Fur Nebula. All of the objects are located in the Monoceros constellation and are located about 720 parsecs or 2,300 light-years from Earth. Due to its relative proximity and large size, it is extremely well studied. NGC 2264 is sometimes referred to as the Christmas Tree Cluster and the Cone Nebula. However, the designation of NGC 2264 in the New General Catalogue refers to both objects and not the cluster alone.

Comments, good, bad and indifferent are welcome. And as always, what you see is what you get, thanks for looking!

Clear Skies!

That is absolutely gorgeous Chris!

[chris_g]

That is absolutely gorgeous Chris!

Thank you, if I can get the nebula looking good, I'll add it in