M33 the Triangulum Galaxy

[Menno555]

M33 the Triangulum Galaxy

A full sensor object for me.
On purpose not too bright so that the core is visible in a good way.
Tricky to process though: it all acts like a "clump" of colors.

The Netherlands, Bortle 7/8
Meade LX65 8" f/10 ACF OTA
Ioptron CEM25EC mount (no guiding)
Baader Neodymium SkyGlow filter
Zwo ASI294MC Pro camera

Captured with SharpCap Pro
127 x 60 sec @ -20 degrees Celsius / Gain 120 / Offset 4 / White balance R50/B50

Stacked in DeepSkyStacker 127 lights + 40 darks + 100 flats + 100 dark flats

Processed in Siril and Photoshop
Siril: Histogram and Color Calibration
Photoshop: Levels, Curves, color strengthening. Astronomy Tools actions: Contrast enhancement, Less Crunchy More Fuzzy, noise reduction. Size reduction

2000px resolution on https://i.imgur.com/Uqb4zXV.jpg

[turfpit]

Nice image Menno, M33 is not the easiest of objects.

Dave

[Menno555]

Thanks Dave.
Maybe a stupid question, but why is it not the easiest? Some more people said that but not why.
I am still oblivious with that kind of info, for me it's just aim and use the settings that make sense to me and then capture.

Menno

[umasscrew39]

Menno- this is an excellent image- well done.

Bruce

[oopfan]

Menno,

I agree, well done!

Include me with Dave, it is not an easy target. Why? I like to see bright images so I become spoiled when I see this:
https://apod.nasa.gov/apod/ap160917.html

That is only possible with a lot of integration time, dark skies, and a large scope. Two things prevent me:
1. My sensor isn't large enough to fit the whole thing.
2. My refractor does not focus blue.

So I'm limited by my equipment. If you are not limited the only thing that stands in your way are your skies. Your Bortle class puts an upper limit on what is achievable within a reasonable amount of time (say in the course of a single session or several sessions.) You can do it but are you willing to invest 25 hours?

Don't get me wrong, Menno, your image is great. It is way better than my effort. My problem is that I compare my work to others and often I am disappointed. I guess that the Astronomy industry loves us competing against each other. It ensures a constant flow of new money for equipment!

Brian

[Menno555]

Brain

Thanks for explaining, I see what they mean now.
Luckily I am not limited ... well, I am with my equipment and my Bortle skies. But I'm not limited with what I see how others capture it. Other people, other places, other skies ... so I just do what I think is cool/nice/interesting. I learned with making my art that comparing yourself to others and their work, has a way too limiting effect on your own work

Menno

[nexusjeep]

Hi Menno,
Cracking image I like M33 as it is a good size target, I have not imaged it for a while and not since I got the new scope and more recently new colour camera so you have definitely sown a seed for a possible target. I agree with your sentiments that I do the hobby for my own gratification and wonder and do not judge against others better or worse as we are all doing are best and learning and growing all the time and as Brian says keeping the astro companies afloat.

I used to own an off road JEEP and that used to be an acronym for Just Empty Every Pocket as it was bloody expensive but think Astrophotography could compete pretty well in that department.

I am also constantly amazed as to what we as amateurs can achieve and see with the kit that we have and it is a constant source of entertainment to see what we can come up with or image next in terms of processes and kit although I feel the term amateur paints the wrong picture.

Keep the images coming.

Cheers
Nick

[Menno555]

Thanks Nick!
And yes, a money pit it is It takes strength and personality to be able to say "Do I really need that? Does it give better captures? Is it useful to get that under my Bortle 8 skies?" and so on. So far I succeeded is failing big time with that

Menno

[umasscrew39]

Beautiful image, Menno!!

Bruce

[timh]

Hello Menno

Apologies ...a load of questions here about the equipment rather than the image ...

That is a nice sharp image of M33 - as was your deep image of the Pelican nebula. Slightly off topic but I was wondering about the equipment you are using because I am also thinking of getting an 8 " catadioptric - possibly an Edge or possibly as yours- to perch on my HEQ5 PRO - which nominally at least - has a similar weight carrying capacity to your Ioptron mount but without the spring worms and encoders. However the discussion boards are full of dire warnings about the perils of trying to put an f 2000 mm scope on a nominally under-specified mount and the impossibility of guiding catadioptrics unless you do it off-axis etc. All a bit off-putting..

Nevertheless - I have been really impressed with your images and would be happy indeed if I were able to produce similar. The whole discussion about guiding seems moot if - given a good CMOS cameras like the ASI294 - you can get great results - as you have - without guiding. I would imagine working as I have been with the dob and using FWHM-filtered shorter exposures autostacked in Sharpcap and then stacked in DSS. However - at F10 - the exposure times clearly can't be too short or images will all end up too dark and insensitive to faint detail?

So finally getting to my questions . How long an unguided exposure (under still conditions) can you run on your F10 set up before the FWHM values (e.g. that you can see in DSS) start to go up significantly ? i.e. there must be some time after which the movement within a frame starts to blur it? Secondly what does Sharpcap BRAIN have to recommend about these maximum exposure times with and without filters in place? Finally - have you tried comparing results obtained using 2x2 binning or a reducer to change the arc sec per pixel scale?

Any insights much appreciated.

best wishes
Tim