TheSkySearchers

I've taken data on this portion of the sky for three years in a row. Each year I save the calibrated images for possible later use. This year I used WBPP in PixInsight to combine a total of 139 images (sulfur, hydrogen and oxygen) from this year (three nights earlier this week, the first time I've been out since turning 81) and 2020 and 2021. All I had to do was load the calibrated images into WBPP. WBPP took care of sorting the images by filter, registering all the images and then integrating the images. 35 minutes later it "spit out" the integrated and aligned S, H and O master images - very cool!!!! I was pleased to see that the added data did indeed reduce the background noise.

There are four major objects in the FOV. The Lobster Claw nebula in the upper right quadrant of the image (LBN 537), the Northern Lagoon nebula in the upper left corner (LBN 542), the Bubble nebula just below and to the left of the center of the image (LBN 548) and the Cassiopeia Salt-and-Pepper Cluster (M52) in the lower left corner of the image.


Equipment and software in the Signature
Lights: 44 x10 min S, 48 x 10 min H, 47 x 10 min O (Total exposure 23 hr 10 min)

Enjoy - Steve

Glad you were able to get out and collect some photons Steve.

Very nice image. I have yet to use WBPP in Pixinsight.

Excellent image and wonderfully framed!
APOD worthy for sure!

Larry

You got a decent result of this area Steve, I have found this area to be difficult to get a good result on, not just me but othyers I know. So it was a good idea to continue ti capture data as you did.

If you fancy making a mosaic, the Wizard and Cave nebulae are also nearby.

Carole

That's awesome Steve!

carastro wrote: ↑Sat Sep 17, 2022 10:51 pm You got a decent result of this area Steve, I have found this area to be difficult to get a good result on, not just me but othyers I know. So it was a good idea to continue ti capture data as you did.

If you fancy making a mosaic, the Wizard and Cave nebulae are also nearby.

Carole

Thanks Carole - I checked for an overlap with my existing Wizard and Cave nebulae, but, no luck. It was worth checking!

Steve

Very nice detail and color, Steve. It looks a little exuberant for you - maybe turning 81 has released some inhibitions? Seriously, this is some excellent work and stick-to-it-iv-ness - well done.

Bob

Mac wrote: ↑Sat Sep 17, 2022 9:03 pm Glad you were able to get out and collect some photons Steve.

Very nice image. I have yet to use WBPP in Pixinsight.

Thanks Steve. I didn't try WBPP for a long time because it scared me! Sooooo many options and buttons and .... Now I use it with default settings and it works great. I wish I had tried it sooner. Like anything else it takes a little getting used to. However, it is such a time saver once you learn it. Maybe you could try it with data you have already processed using your current techniques?

Larry 1969 wrote: ↑Sat Sep 17, 2022 9:06 pm Excellent image and wonderfully framed!
APOD worthy for sure!

Larry

Thanks for the nice words Larry.

Ylem wrote: ↑Sat Sep 17, 2022 11:29 pm That's awesome Steve!

Thanks. I think it is becoming my favorite!

bobharmony wrote: ↑Sun Sep 18, 2022 2:49 am Very nice detail and color, Steve. It looks a little exuberant for you - maybe turning 81 has released some inhibitions? Seriously, this is some excellent work and stick-to-it-iv-ness - well done.

Bob

Thanks Bob. Never to late to change and grow!

Steve

You really captured the color -- the beautiful color -- of that region. The Bubble comes through in detail and the over-all framing is perfect.

It's the kind of image I found myself staring at for a few minutes.

Definitely an APOD candidate!

BABO

A beautiful compilation of the data Steve!

Its great to start a process with data in the bank.

WBPP is awesome! I use most of the presets unless I run into problems, but I have gotten very good results using keywords.

I recently tried drizzle in WBPP (my image scale with the Sharpstar 61 is almost 3) and got nice results, but had problems with the star cores. Went to manually Image Integration Drizzle integration and got much better results. The stars are amazing!

Your motivation is inspiring Steve!

You’re work is wonderful!

Fine work Steve, playing the long game well.

Impressive!

Very nice steve well done

Thats a great Image Steve. i finf the new WBPP is excellent. Funnlily enough I'm working right nowon a 4 panel mosaic of this area to include, as @carastro suggested, the cave and the wizard.

brill Steve thanks

BABOafrica wrote: ↑Sun Sep 18, 2022 7:11 am You really captured the color -- the beautiful color -- of that region. The Bubble comes through in detail and the over-all framing is perfect.

It's the kind of image I found myself staring at for a few minutes.

Definitely an APOD candidate!

BABO

Thanks Joe - I first shot this area with my DSLR camera. It captured my imagination, but, I could never do justice to the area. NB imaging really helps for my location by reducing the LP interference. Glad you enjoyed it.

Juno16 wrote: ↑Sun Sep 18, 2022 10:55 am A beautiful compilation of the data Steve!

Its great to start a process with data in the bank.

WBPP is awesome! I use most of the presets unless I run into problems, but I have gotten very good results using keywords.

I recently tried drizzle in WBPP (my image scale with the Sharpstar 61 is almost 3) and got nice results, but had problems with the star cores. Went to manually Image Integration Drizzle integration and got much better results. The stars are amazing!

Your motivation is inspiring Steve!

You’re work is wonderful!

Thanks for the really nice words Jim. I knew I had previous data, but, wasn't sure how I was going to combine all of it. There is a lot of "bookkeeping" when doing it manually. WBPP made it a breeze. Based on your comment I just tried Drizzle on this image because my image scale is 2.25". It definitely improved the stars and I didn't see any degradation of the star cores. Maybe just different data? Of course the drizzled image is now 4X larger than the original!!! I used the default settings and 2X drizzle.
I'm not familiar with using keywords. What do you use them for?

Greenman wrote: ↑Sun Sep 18, 2022 11:00 am Fine work Steve, playing the long game well.

Thanks. Haha - the long game. I wish I had enough data on all my targets to always play the "long game". It makes the processing so much easier.

Ed217 wrote: ↑Sun Sep 18, 2022 11:41 amImpressive!

UkDave wrote: ↑Sun Sep 18, 2022 11:49 am Very nice steve well done

Thanks Dave.

Jockinireland wrote: ↑Sun Sep 18, 2022 1:57 pm Thats a great Image Steve. i finf the new WBPP is excellent. Funnlily enough I'm working right nowon a 4 panel mosaic of this area to include, as @carastro suggested, the cave and the wizard.

Thanks David. I applaud your efforts for the 4-panel mosaic. I just don't have the stamina to take on a project like that. It took me three years to get the data for this image and it's only 1-panel!!!

Mirrorgirl wrote: ↑Sun Sep 18, 2022 4:37 pm brill Steve thanks

Thanks Rhoda.


Steve

Beautiful image Steve. I'm just now starting to collect data that I feel is worthy of hanging on to for future photons.

STEVE333 wrote: ↑Sun Sep 18, 2022 11:14 pm

Juno16 wrote: ↑Sun Sep 18, 2022 10:55 am A beautiful compilation of the data Steve!

Its great to start a process with data in the bank.

WBPP is awesome! I use most of the presets unless I run into problems, but I have gotten very good results using keywords.

I recently tried drizzle in WBPP (my image scale with the Sharpstar 61 is almost 3) and got nice results, but had problems with the star cores. Went to manually Image Integration Drizzle integration and got much better results. The stars are amazing!

Your motivation is inspiring Steve!

You’re work is wonderful!

Thanks for the really nice words Jim. I knew I had previous data, but, wasn't sure how I was going to combine all of it. There is a lot of "bookkeeping" when doing it manually. WBPP made it a breeze. Based on your comment I just tried Drizzle on this image because my image scale is 2.25". It definitely improved the stars and I didn't see any degradation of the star cores. Maybe just different data? Of course the drizzled image is now 4X larger than the original!!! I used the default settings and 2X drizzle.
I'm not familiar with using keywords. What do you use them for?


Steve

Grouping keywords are better described in this PI release announcement (6-2-21) https://pixinsight.com/forum/index.php? ... sed.16638/.

Also,you mentioned using drizzle in WBPP. It is surprising simple, but I did have some issues with star cores.

In the release notes linked above, in the section “What's new: Main Features in Summary”, I used saw this:

“rangeClipHigh is now disabled in ImageIntegration: solving the questioned black pixels issue in the drizzled images”

Not finding a selection for “clip high” in WBPP, I just used the ImageIntegration (ClipHigh unchecked) and DrizzleIntegration processes on the registered images. That cured the issue with the star cores in the drizzled image.

I had tried the manual drizzle process before, but quit because the extra processing time and file size wasn’t worth it to me.
After recently using WBPP to process up to registration, it’s no big deal running the ImageIntegration and DrizzleIntegration processes afterward. I need to work out a file management routine to lessen the impact of the extra disk space.
To me, the much improved stars is worth it.

Juno16 wrote: ↑Mon Sep 19, 2022 2:03 am
Grouping keywords are better described in this PI release announcement (6-2-21) https://pixinsight.com/forum/index.php? ... sed.16638/.

Also,you mentioned using drizzle in WBPP. It is surprising simple, but I did have some issues with star cores.

In the release notes linked above, in the section “What's new: Main Features in Summary”, I used saw this:

“rangeClipHigh is now disabled in ImageIntegration: solving the questioned black pixels issue in the drizzled images”

Not finding a selection for “clip high” in WBPP, I just used the ImageIntegration (ClipHigh unchecked) and DrizzleIntegration processes on the registered images. That cured the issue with the star cores in the drizzled image.

I had tried the manual drizzle process before, but quit because the extra processing time and file size wasn’t worth it to me.
After recently using WBPP to process up to registration, it’s no big deal running the ImageIntegration and DrizzleIntegration processes afterward. I need to work out a file management routine to lessen the impact of the extra disk space.
To me, the much improved stars is worth it.

Thanks for the feedback Jim. I think they just had an update to WBPP so maybe they fixed the "star cores" problem. I didn't see any trace of it in my WBPP Drizzled images for large or small or dim or bright stars. I really like how it makes the stars look more realistic and not pixelated.

Steve

I don’t use Pi but I do follow Adam block studios on you tube and Adam has done 16 videos on WBPP if that’s of interest to anyone not aware of adams work .