M31 mosaic, LRGBHa

[manic knoll]

Super high resolution.

Image is made up of RGB captured with 8 inch newt F6 (1200 mm FL) and mono data from 8 inch newt F4 (800mmFL).

Just found this one below to the right from M110.

[vagrant otter]

how much integration time

[manic knoll]

It is a mosaic so it is going to be a lot if calculated as a sum, but about 4 hours per frame of RGB, then add about 5-6 hours of L and 2-4 hours of Ha. I guess about 13 hours of data for each frame. Original was 3x3 mosaic but that image was like 20 000x15000 pixels so it is reduced to about half by cropping and downscaling.

[vernal crater]

i am searching for your ass on astrobin

i need more images

[vernal crater]

i cant find it

[manic knoll]

Not on there 😁.

[vernal crater]

god damn it

[plain kindle]

very few images i just genuinely enjoy staring at

this is one of them

detail is superb

[remote adder]

holy cow

[fresh bane]

@vast horizon 😩

[vast horizon]

Oh myyyy 😩

8" inch too

Damn I need to decide whether to make an f4 or f6 8" scope

This image is beautiful tho

[fresh bane]

What FL u wanna go for 😛

[vast horizon]

That's the question 😭

1200mm might be nice for smaller galaxies ngl

[fresh bane]

Yeah. How about a 1000?

[vast horizon]

I think what I need is TWO 8" scopes, one 800mm another 1200mm B)

[fresh bane]

Yeah while ur at it, why not..

[fresh bane]

2 scopes on 1 mount

[manic knoll]

https://youtu.be/pnNJTSqu1s8?si=2ZIUejXbGfp0A2dh

[violet surge]

Holy wow the detail in M110 is actually insane

resolved so many individual stars

those background galaxies are impressive, this whole image is crazy

[manic knoll]

I believe the M110 details are more like groups of stars, not single stars.

[violet surge]

Oh ok, that's still just objectively really impressive though

how many stars would you estimate to be in each little group?

[manic knoll]

When comparing to Hubble images I would say 3-5 of what is visible in the HST data. The same for the fainter details in M31 except the blue giants, they are single stars.

[violet surge]

that's cool to know, thanks

It's amazing that some of the blue giant stars in M31 are large and luminous enough to be individually resolved with ground based amateur setups, that will never not be amazing to me

[manic knoll]

Like this, except from the obvious si hole stars, the patched area are groups of brighter and not so bright stars

[manic knoll]

I know! And also other galaxies like M33.

[violet surge]

NGC-604 in M33 must look absolutely insane from inside the galaxy, there's so much going on in there

[fresh bane]

We need a combined 1000 hours with the biggest scope to see whatsup there

[violet surge]

Honestly it doesn't even really take that much. Many people here with their amateur setups and maybe only a few dozen hours have resolved some pretty insane details in NGC-604. Hubble and JWST need even less time ofc, considering they are massive telescopes in space.

NGC-604 is ~6,300x more luminous than the Orion Nebula. If it existed the same distance away from us as M42, its nebulosity would have a similar if not higher apparent magnitude than Venus.

[plain kindle]

there was already a 1k hour project on m31, it was quite wide field tho

[fresh bane]

Yep. Looked very juicy

[fresh bane]

Ye but the more the merrier right?

[violet surge]

I mean, I guess lol

[fresh bane]

Imagine the whole DC server did a collab for the one in the NH

[violet surge]

Although I do wonder if there would ever be a point where you genuinely just have too much integration time, and the whole image gets blown out

[fresh bane]

One way to find out

[plain kindle]

how can that happen

[violet surge]

Idk?

Like, thousands of hours of integration on M31 would surely blow out the entire inner galaxy, right?

Or would that just not happen

[plain kindle]

stacking isnt addative

you just get higher signal to noise

[lone marsh]

INSANE SHOT

[wispy marlin]

Det här är genuint sjukt.

[vagrant otter]

Wait, so it just lowers your noise and stuff so you can stretch more?

That can’t be right

[plain kindle]

its crazy right 😯

[vagrant otter]

so then how are faint details captured

is that just additive stacking

[plain kindle]

wait im losing the bit

r u being fr

[grizzled sundial]

No. The stacking software does not add the value A + value B, it's more or less their average. And since the signal of the object observed is more or less consistent ot gets reinforced and the average of 2 pixels that contain true signal will always be higher than the average of 2 noisy pixels. So if you keep doing that you get to a point where the noise value gets averaged to almost a value of 0 while the signal gets much more defined

[plain kindle]

i thought this was sarcasm because thats basically how it works 😭

[lone marsh]

yeah its visibble in my m31 too

if u zoom in

[lone marsh]

why did you use 2 different newts?

[manic knoll]

I use them at the same time = double the time. There are so few clear nights so I try to really use them as good as possible 🙂

[manic knoll]

Really nice data!

[grizzled sundial]

Me and @cinder path we did took a peak at it

[fresh bane]

beautiful

Even a galaxy in the background above it

[grizzled sundial]

Thanks. The whole project was very low integration. About 2.6h combined

[fresh bane]

That’s great. I can’t wait to use my 8inch dob > newt to see what it can do.

[grizzled sundial]

Ok. 4.6h if you add the Luminance

[grizzled sundial]

#1413985790488481953 message

If you're interested in what equipment was used. You can find it in this post

[fresh bane]

Right on!

[lone marsh]

thanks!

[lone marsh]

oh ok

[grizzled sundial]

Omg bruv... that is actually genius
I have to do that as well