M78 with part of Barnard's Loop

[Mike Lewis]

So here is my final image from the remote session, as my friend is traveling back to CO from AZ for a while. I hope to get back to imaging at the back part of March, and that will be with my higher magnification OTA.

I REALLY introduced myself to a bunch a annoyance on the post-processing of this target. Even though I have had this same issue in the past, once again I ended up with a supposedly interim version made from less data being my final image because I could not duplicate the look when trying to reprocess the object with new data added. Sigh. But I finally decided that even using the ~3 hours of data from the 1st night instead of what would have been closer to 6 hours of data from 2 nights I ended up with a decent result.

Link to larger viewable version on Astrobin here:

https://www.astrobin.com/miwp5e/

This colorful region shows off both the blue reflection nebula known as M78, and also a glowing tendril of the much larger emission nebula called Barnard's Loop, both of which are part of the larger Orion Molecular Cloud Complex. The loop is a remnant of a supernova explosion estimated to have occurred approximately 2 million years ago. With a larger FOV Barnard's loop would be seen as a large and faint circular arc of gas slowly expanding outward from what was the supernova's epicenter. That cannot be seen in this image that only includes a small segment of the loop. But I did like the contrast between the blue reflection nebulosity red emission nebulosity.

This image was shot in natural light through RGB filters and then additional Hα data was collected and added to accentuate the portion of Barnard's Loop, as well as some of the very faint nebulosity in the region.

Comments and critiques welcome. This puts a wrap on this remote imaging session, a very successful one that saw me getting a total of 5 new images in about a month and a half, a very good haul, given that my approach is quality over quantity. I got my first ever comet image, as well as my new personal favorite deep sky image (The Seagull Nebula). I think all of these were posted to FW already, but just in case here is a look back at the entire set on my website for those interested.

https://www.thinairphotography.com/Astrophotography-Trip-Based/AZ-Remote-9-January-2023/

For the M78 image shown abnove, here is the technical info:

Equipment:
QHY268M Camera @ -10C and
Gain:56 Offset:25
Software Bisque MyT Mount
Stellarvue SVQ100 Astrograph Refractor, 580mm @ f/5.8
Antlia Pro Filters (3nm narrowband plus LRGB)
Askar FMA180 Guidescope/ASI290MM

Software:
Pixinsight Commercial Version 1.8
Lightroom CC
Photoshop CC
N.I.N.A. Control Software
BlurXTerminator (Russell Croman)
StarXTerminator (Russell Croman)
NoiseXTerminator (Russell Croman)

Light Frames:
Ha: 10 x 480 secs ( 1 hrs 20 mins)
Red: 11 x 180 secs (33 mins)
Green: 11 x 180 secs (33 mins)
Blue: 11 x 180 secs (33 mins)


2 hrs 59 mins total

Dark Frames:
10 x 180 secs (30 mins)
10 x 600 secs (1 hr 40 mins, optimized)

 

[Ben Egbert]

Outstanding

 

[JimFox]

Great job Mike! You had a really good session, especially considering the light leak issues that preceeded it. It's great that your equipment was able to get settled down and working like a charm.

This is one I had wished to capture, and maybe I still can. It's a pretty fun looking object. I know that feeling about not being able to duplicate a certain look. It's funny how that is, but I have experienced that too.

I like all of this, though it looks like the brightest red area may have blown out the red channel a bit. That Ha signal seems overly strong in that one section to me. The rest looks great, maybe tone that down just a hair? But you know better then me, so maybe it's good?

 

[Alisa]

This is cool!

 

[AlanLichty]

Stunning result. I am impressed.

 

[Mike Lewis]

Great job Mike! You had a really good session, especially considering the light leak issues that preceeded it. It's great that your equipment was able to get settled down and working like a charm.

This is one I had wished to capture, and maybe I still can. It's a pretty fun looking object. I know that feeling about not being able to duplicate a certain look. It's funny how that is, but I have experienced that too.

I like all of this, though it looks like the brightest red area may have blown out the red channel a bit. That Ha signal seems overly strong in that one section to me. The rest looks great, maybe tone that down just a hair? But you know better then me, so maybe it's good?

Jim,

I think looking at that modification could make sense, thanks!

ML

 

[Comet Hunter]

well done, nice capture.

 

[Mike Lewis]

Jim,

I think looking at that modification could make sense, thanks!

ML

@JimFox

Jim,

It was an interesting question and so I went back and looked at this. The red is accentuated by the Hα which is of course my intention. The actual level of the Red channel does not appear to be clipping. I checked it in PixInsight and the highest values I could find were about 55,000 counts. Bright but below the 16 bit saturation level. The Histogram in Lightroom seems to bear this out:

This is something I was struggling with and tweaking the entire time I was trying top post process the entire dataset. The best of those results I reluctantly post here now:

In exchange for maybe more definition in the brightest part of Barnard's Loop, I have lost the other faint red nebulosity, lost the best of the blue reflection nebulosity, and gotten an overall Magenta cast to the image. Mind you this is one of about 6 subsequent tries to the image posted above. So after looking at results online I decided not to get too hung up on wasted data and that the original was good enough to post. I really appreciate the feedback though as it is very easy to get fixated on one part of what you want the image to become and manage to screw up some other part of it, especially with astro images. That is what makes a feedback equipped astro forum like we have here on FocalWorld so valuable!

ML

 

[JimFox]

Hey Mike, thanks for including that histogram. That's pretty amazing as it sure looks like the reds in that section are getting clipped, but the histogram says they aren't. That's odd, though I do know reds in general are the worst color for being blown out.

I like the lesser reds in that core area. I had thought you would just use a mask on that brightest area so you could retain the background Ha signal, as I do think that's pretty cool. I also like the Oiii signal better in your original then the edit. It's more blue in the original and has a bit of a purple hue in the edit.

So if you can humor me.... I would take the core or of the Ha in the edit, and just blend it into your original, that will tone down the core just a bit while leaving the rest of the background Ha and the Oiii alone.

 

[Mike Lewis]

Hey Mike, thanks for including that histogram. That's pretty amazing as it sure looks like the reds in that section are getting clipped, but the histogram says they aren't. That's odd, though I do know reds in general are the worst color for being blown out.

I like the lesser reds in that core area. I had thought you would just use a mask on that brightest area so you could retain the background Ha signal, as I do think that's pretty cool. I also like the Oiii signal better in your original then the edit. It's more blue in the original and has a bit of a purple hue in the edit.

So if you can humor me.... I would take the core or of the Ha in the edit, and just blend it into your original, that will tone down the core just a bit while leaving the rest of the background Ha and the Oiii alone.

OK, let me see if my Photoshop skills are up to that assignment

ML

 

[Mike Lewis]

@JimFox,

OK, here is what I got. maybe more subtle than you were intending., but I do not want to lose the faint nebulosity around the edges of the loop. I am not sure if I like it better or not, it introduces some of that extra structure into the loop, but also introduces the magenta halos around stars in that area. It was interesting to do though. Perhaps with some more work it could be refined more. What do you think?

ML

 

[Ben Egbert]

Spectacular.

 

[JimFox]

Hey Mike, I will check this new update closer when I get back to my daughters, but a quick glance here I think I like it best. But I can't see any of the finer details like halos until I get back on my computer.

 

[JimFox]

Hey Mike, I don't think you have any halo's to be concerned about. Maybe at 100% you are seeing them, but even on the larger version nothing is jumping out at me. There are times with the OSC guys, when we use like the L-Extreme or some of the other filters designed for color cameras that brighter stars will have really bad halo's that a person can't miss seeing. On yours? Even looking hard, there is really nothing I see.

 

[Mike Lewis]

So your vote is for the updated version then. I am going to see if any other votes come in on preferences (maybe Ben is indicating he also likes this second version better, not sure, I appreciate his feedback in any case ) while I sit on it a few days and see how I end up feeling about it. It does bring out a little more definition and structure in the brightest part of the loop, which was what I was initially going for when I added the extras data and tried to reprocess...

ML

 

[Les]

Great work Mike

 

[Ben Egbert]

By my count there are 3 versions the last is my favorite. It’s hard to judge when scrolling up and down . What I notice most is the stars in the second version are too prominent.