Pillars of Creation

[Colorado_CJ]

I shot the Sulfur II data last night to add to the data I shot last week, completing my first Pillars of Creation, or Eagle Nebula photo.

This is only 75 minutes of H-Alpha, 75 minutes of Sulfur II and 50 minutes of Oxygen III data. I need to shoot more data, but I only have about 2 hours a night where this is visible from my house.

I am thinking of taking the scope out to a different site this weekend so that I can shoot longer than 2 hours on this.

Anyway, here it is!

[Peter McLennan]

This is only 75 minutes of H-Alpha, 75 minutes of Sulfur II and 50 minutes of Oxygen III data. I need to shoot more data

Heh.  Don't we all.    What a fascinating way to approach photography. What an amazing image. 

Is it possible to point your equipment so precisely that you can return to that image and continue to "shoot more data", later adding to the image?

[Eric Myrvaagnes]

What a fascinating way to approach photography. What an amazing image. 

+1.

I can't imagine it can get much more spectacular than this.

[John R]

Heh.  Don't we all.    What a fascinating way to approach photography. What an amazing image. 

Is it possible to point your equipment so precisely that you can return to that image and continue to "shoot more data", later adding to the image?

Fabulous night sky image. I am also wondering about this question.

JR

[Colorado_CJ]

Thanks everyone.

Something wasn't sitting right with me with this image, but I didn't really see it until tonight.  There was too much of a green/yellow cast to the image and it wasn't matching very good with the real Hubble images.  So, I tried to fix it somewhat.

I am more happy with this revision as it is closer to the true Hubble Palette.

[Colorado_CJ]

Heh.  Don't we all.    What a fascinating way to approach photography. What an amazing image. 

Is it possible to point your equipment so precisely that you can return to that image and continue to "shoot more data", later adding to the image?

Yes, there is a thing called "plate solving" that the imaging software has built into it where the software takes a photo, then uses triangulation with its built in database to know exactly where the scope is pointing.  So, you simply plate solve the image and the software will move the scope to the exact, to the pixel coordinates that you were using on the previous outing.

Even better, the stacking software that stacks the images can use data from many different camera/telescope setups and will stack the images seamlessly, so you don't even have to use the same scope/camera to make an image. 

It is extremely hard to believe what is out there now for amateur astrophotographers, both in software and hardware.  The extreme precision available now days, and for comparatively little money, is awesome.

[fdisilvestro]

Yes, there is a thing called "plate solving" that the imaging software has built into it where the software takes a photo, then uses triangulation with its built in database to know exactly where the scope is pointing.  So, you simply plate solve the image and the software will move the scope to the exact, to the pixel coordinates that you were using on the previous outing.

Even better, the stacking software that stacks the images can use data from many different camera/telescope setups and will stack the images seamlessly, so you don't even have to use the same scope/camera to make an image. 

It is extremely hard to believe what is out there now for amateur astrophotographers, both in software and hardware.  The extreme precision available now days, and for comparatively little money, is awesome.

Fascinating, this and the picture!

[Paulo Bizarro]

Wonderful shot. IMO, the second image looks better, but I have no idea if actually the green/yellows were the real colour of the star field?