HorseHead and Flame WIP 2019

[Astrovetteman]

Here's my first installment, for this year, of the HorseHead and Flame Nebulas. I've been trying to get enough data to process, over the last 3 weeks...weather's been CRAPPY!!!! I managed to get around 4 hours each of H-Alpha, SII, and OIII with the NP127 and at the same time got around 6 hours of RGB and 6 hours of L (various exposure times..60s, 180s, 300s, and 420s) with the TV-85. So I threw it all together and this is what came out. Not happy with the blue halos around some of the stars and I'm not real happy with the color...but hey, more exposure time might make it better!
Anyway, hope ya like it, so far!

Tom
HAPPY THANKSGIVING!!!!

[UlteriorModem]

Very Dynamic! Great stuff!

[ic_1101]

Wow! That's a beauty Tom. You also did a super job of taming Alnitak.

[Ken_nneth]

Oh thats nice. I really like this. Great job.
Clear Skies

[OzEclipse]

Wow....just Wow. Beautiful Tom

[Jockinireland]

Fantastic!

[Mac]

That's just awesome!

[Hankmeister3]

Startling details! Beautifully rendered! To repeat Steve … AWESOME. And wouldn't you know it, I came here to post my own single-frame image of the Horsehead and Flame Nebulas but now I hesitate.

... But I'm going to go ahead and post my capture from 3/11/19 as a sort of a tutorial between an okay nice image of the Horsehead using the rather simple single-frame capture protocol I generally use as compared to what Tom and other advanced astro-photographers can do by stacking multiple images and pulling out all the stops in post-production. Different strokes and all that but clearly in the final analysis some strokes are visually better than others! BTW, I just scrolled back up to take another peek and … WOW. I could look at that image for an hour and find still more subtle details.

Tom, this is one of the best ground-based image I've seen of the Horsehead Nebula region but I have to admit I haven't seen them all either, even on this site.

Very, very well done. Another piece of incredibly eye candy for those who are really into celestial images, both visually and photographically.

Tom, altogether from data acquisition to post-production, how many hours do you have in this particular capture? Whatever the number, it's clearly worth every minute.

[dcrowson]

Tom,

this is fantastic.

Dan

[Astrovetteman]

Startling details! Beautifully rendered! To repeat Steve … AWESOME. And wouldn't you know it, I came here to post my own single-frame image of the Horsehead and Flame Nebulas but now I hesitate.

... But I'm going to go ahead and post my capture from 3/11/19 as a sort of a tutorial between an okay nice image of the Horsehead using the rather simple single-frame capture protocol I generally use as compared to what Tom and other advanced astro-photographers can do by stacking multiple images and pulling out all the stops in post-production. Different strokes and all that but clearly in the final analysis some strokes are visually better than others! BTW, I just scrolled back up to take another peek and … WOW. I could look at that image for an hour and find still more subtle details.

Tom, this is one of the best ground-based image I've seen of the Horsehead Nebula region but I have to admit I haven't seen them all either, even on this site.

Very, very well done. Another piece of incredibly eye candy for those who are really into celestial images, both visually and photographically.

Tom, altogether from data acquisition to post-production, how many hours do you have in this particular capture? Whatever the number, it's clearly worth every minute.

Thanks Hank for all the nice comments! To answer your question about how much time....there's really only about 12 hours actual imaging time ( I use a side-by-side, so I take NB with one scope and RGB or L with the other, simultaneously ), and probably about 10-12 hours processing time... I always mess around trying different settings in Pixinsight to get things the way I want them....there's just SO many ways to process Nebulas, especially with NB.
Thanks Again!!
Tom

[Astrovetteman]

Tom,

this is fantastic.

Dan

Hey Dan, thanks very much!! The weather this Fall has not been cooperating....but I've tried to get out whenever it's been clear...just wish it would be nice when the Moon wasn't interfering too much!!
Thanks Again !!
Tom

[STEVE333]

Beautiful details on the Horsehead Tom - Look forward to any/all updates.

Steve

[Hankmeister3]

Thanks, Tom, for your tutorial on all the hard work that went into producing such a compelling and beautiful image of a very, very difficult DSO. An image like this would have been virtually impossible ten or fifteen years ago using land-based, moderately-sized "amateur" telescope and reasonably-priced software and computing power. And you did all this through a five-inch piece of glass … well, a lot of 21st Century technology, figuring and engineering did go into that 3-piece apochromatic objective

Such state-of-the-art imaging is breathtaking … and inspirational. And the real kicker is … you still think you can do better! Heh!

More please.

[j.gardavsky]

Hello Tom,

another masterpiece of yours, and right timing to the Thangsgiving,
JG

[MariusD69]

Looks amazing! Great work, Tom!!

[Hankmeister3]

I've been pondering, Tom … oh, oh, now you're all are in trouble! I'm not trying to hijack your thread but I think I may have had a minor epiphany of sorts.

I don't know if this is the place to throw this idea out and maybe I'm unaware if this question has been posed before and I'm simply repeating someone (years) before me regarding amateur astrophotography and the efficacy of stacking a long series of images, but here goes.

Query: I know that with every single frame we digitally capture, we're actually recording "data", photonic data. And how much data is dependent upon how long the imaging device (CCD/CMOS) is exposed to this train of photons. And we also know that there are only so many photons which are raining down through a given optical aperture on a second-by-second basis (I won't get into objective size and f-ratios since these only determine how concentrated these photons are per square millimeter of CCD/CMOS or retina). So I ask, what exactly is stacking accomplishing?

I'm no physicist, but I do have a working knowledge of optics/optical theory, photography in general, viewing conditions, (old school) film "grain", digital noise, and the construction/design of our eyes and why they see what they see as it all relates to our collective astronomical pursuits both visually and photographically. I would be interested in other members' thoughts or clarifications on this topic.



At this point in my general ignorance of the topic of stacking and other post-production manipulations and given my own (limited) understanding of the various factors involved in digital image manipulation, I make these personal observations:

1) The final quality and "fineness" of any astronomical image will never exceed the absolute resolving power of the main objective used to capture a native image or series of images though there are highly sophisticated CGI software which can appear to potentially do just that. In my opinion, in effect, stacking and other post-production manipulations can never resolve any more detail than what the main primary optic can resolve (per Dawes limit) though it may APPEAR that the Dawes limit is being exceeded because of the stunning clarity and the fully resolved details of the final image.

2) In effect, what astronomical image stacking, combined with other post-production techniques, is actually doing is artificially or synthetically creating a final image which essentially cancels out the distorting effects of this planet's atmosphere as well as inherent electronic noise. It also "cancels out" the effects of artificial lights, ionized "skyglow" an other photonic atmospheric effects.

3) Multiple image stacking and other attendant post-production manipulation also fill in "data gaps". The more images stacked, the more potential for those "gaps" to be filled. In effect, stacking images (and flats and darks) smooths the "grain", extends the dynamic range as well as cancels out most of the "noise" found in digital imaging itself.

My conclusion. In many (if not all) cases what we're witnessing with respect those extremely high-quality (and highly-processed) stacked images many members here are posting, give us a pretty good idea what their equipment is capable of imaging IF THEIR OPTICAL SET-UP WAS IN ORBIT ABOVE ALL OF EARTH'S ATMOSPHERE … near perfect guiding is assumed, of course.

End of musing ...

[Lokifish]

The D range is amazing, and the detail is impressive.

[bobharmony]

Tom, I love the dusty details you have pulled out of the data. This may be the best Horsehead region images I have seen!

Bob

[yobbo89]

pretty good image as expected (it's actually superb!)from an advance imager like you.it can be such a horrible task to image this target. the halos are fine, the image is almost perfect, i only see a small defect that captures my eye which is the streak of blue,a strange diffraction from the bright star Alnitak, you'll have to post some of your processing procedures. when ever i image with that star in the field of view it is a nightmare , the halo and diffraction stretchers over the horsehead nebula. it looks like most users have better success with a refractor over a newt with this target.

[jerrysykes]

Outstanding, Tom!!! As usual.