NGC2264 - Cone/Xmas tree cluster - WIP

[RobertM]

Definitely work in progress this...

100 minutes of Ha in 10 minute subs.  Probably about another 200 minutes till complete but even so the Fox Fur (just above center) is starting to come through.

[Daniel]

That's wonderfull Robert, looks like a bit of Ha might be the way to go with this one, and may help my gradient problems.

Love the faint outer nebulosity that's coming through too, this is a difficult one to process I've found on account of not knowing what's faint nebulosity and what's light polution.

Daniel
:O)

[MarkS]

Robert,

That's an excellent start - I'm looking forward to the final result.  What were the conditions like the night you took it?  My only attempt so far was a disaster because of the lack of transparency.

Mark

[Fay]

Love it, Robert, it is going to be fantastic, as all your images are, must have a go myself

[RobertM]

Daniel,  this one has faint even nebulosity all the way around so you should try to make it even across the image.  This image is bias calibrated and stretched with a tiny amount of sharpening and NR, like all my images now I didn't apply any gradient removal/flatfielding or dark frames.  If clean enough the final image may not need the NR.

Mark, the image was taken on Monday before midnight.  Conditions were ok, not especially clear but certainly good enough to image at this resolution.  Could be your image scale is too high ?

Fay, yes do have a go but make sure you have that cooling and hot pixel problem sorted first!

I think the distance from CCD to FR is wrong as the focal length is coming out at 400 instead of 405 mm - looks like I may have to do some tweeking.  Not sure it would make a tremendous difference with a small CCD but every little bit helps.

[JohnP]

Robert I delayed commenting on this because I wanted to check my raws & result from when I tried it back in early 2008...

I have to say your image is a zillion times better than mine. The FOV you have is much better (a lot more interesting) mine was too narrow & there is not really much going on....   If you add more to it it should be great.

http://homepage.ntlworld.com/john.punnett/graphics/2008/ngc2264-feb08.html

Since we seem to have had a week of coming up with alternative names for nebula's I can think of one or two for my image above...but I'm not going to mention them on a public forum or do any drawings this time..   

John

[RobertM]

It's amazing how the mind plays tricks with these images, hopefully things will get clearer 

I know what you mean about fov, but that's only part of it.  You got the Cone with more detail than this one will ever have and it's in colour which poses it's own problems.  That's a very good result for a misty night.

[JohnP]

Robert - did you see this on UKAI...

http://www.siamesedream.co.uk/ukai/2009/01Jan/ngc2264_large.jpg

[RobertM]

Hi John,

Looks fantastic doesn't it.  Unfortunately that site is blocked from work but it would be interesting to see what equipment he has and where he took it from but I suspect expensive and dark are the answers.

I have over 12 x 20 mins extra exposure to add but the conditions were really bad and only serve to reduce noise but not add that much detail.  This subject needs a really dark site or exceptional conditions to get the best out of it.

[JohnP]

Hi Robert,

Details: Borg 77EII + DGL Reducer + Astronomik Ha: 10x900s (2hrs 30min)....

I think it was with his Art 11002 & yes he lives in rural Wales......

In fact Eddie is the guy that I bought my Atik 16ic of...

Cheers John

PS - I also managed to add another 9X300secs to my JellyFish the other day but made naf all difference to the image..

[RobertM]

That explains how he got such a wide field - Borg 77ED@f/3.5 (with RC) and 11k chipped camera !!!  That is a fast scope and it's produced an exceptionally sharp wide image with the corrector, I'm really impressed.  Can I see a new purchase on the horizon... but the 90 would have to go

[Mike]

Robert why do your images disappear after a few weeks?

[RobertM]

Hmmm, now you mention it they do don't they ... will check out - probably something to do with a loose interpretation of 'static' in the URL

[RobertM]

Have repasted the URL...

[Rick]

Was it the same as before, or had it changed?