PIER-14 IC4592-Blue Horse Nebula

you are right about widefield SHO ! 

i m currently imaging orion region at 50mm in RGB Ha !

I propose    2h L   3h RGB , so 5H hours total .    We can combine L R G B to make a superLiminance file for details 

 

 

 

I see that you are creating a pier15 with the 6200MM and a Canon 200L, very large FOV !!

Not sure if its the new Askar 200mm or Canon 200mm yet. it all depends which one performs best. We will know next week and finalise the pier on the next trip at the end of the month.

Cool, 5hrs a panel will be epic

The new P15 should be an exciting system for ultra-widefield junkies once complete me thinks :)

For me personally the addition of narrowband filters is the important part as I like big narrowband widefields so I suspect it may get a few choice jobs added by me!

Steve

I propose    2h L   3h RGB , so 5H hours total .    We can combine L R G B to make a superLiminance file for details 

I see that you are creating a pier15 with the 6200MM and a Canon 200L, very large FOV !!

that's why i post this target as suggestion , as i now it is low on the horizon , even in spain. 

 

 

i propose to schedule a simple job   of LRGB  40x180s L (2H) , 20x180sRGB (3h total) for each pane , so a job of 5h. 

 

As it is low on the horizon , i dont think that it is possible to shoot more than 1h , 1h30 /day . So lets do a small job 

 

 

I know, and thank you for asking me if it was possible :)

Ps its a bright object and you are seriously early submitting the object which is nice to see and will really help gather all the data. However, may I suggest a little more time than 3 hours as it will help a bucket load, 3hours per pane is a little thin

Like I said (your in nice and early, its only March) so you are 4/8 weeks ahead of schedule on this giving you plenty of time to get the required data I feel :)

Steve

that's why i post this target as suggestion , as i now it is low on the horizon , even in spain. 

i propose to schedule a simple job   of LRGB  40x180s L (2H) , 20x180sRGB (3h total) for each pane , so a job of 5h. 

As it is low on the horizon , i dont think that it is possible to shoot more than 1h , 1h30 /day . So lets do a small job 

Good grief Steve, 

Only a couple of minutes ago I had some kind of premonition about what you were about to post. :) 

Agreed that very low jobs, anything that requires a lowering of the horizon limit should most definitely be avoided. Exceptions being where it is deemed a worthwhile target and is discussed ahead of time amongst members. The Blue Horse as you mentioned being a good example. 

Cheers, 

Ray 

Hello all 

 

i propose to launch a 2 pane mosaic of the blue horsenebula

 

it is very low on the horizon , max at 32degre .  Steve , is ti possible ? 

i assume that orienation is still 90degre for the camera ? 

last year Ophiu nebula was done so i think it is ok 

 

i propose to first launch L data to test and then rgb 

 

florent

Pane, RA, DEC, Position Angle (East), Pane width (arcmins), Pane height (arcmins), Overlap, Row, Column
Pane 1, 16hr 18' 12", -19º 29' 36", 90.00, 211.20, 139.20, 25%, 1, 1
Pane 2, 16hr 10' 48", -19º 29' 36", 90.00, 211.20, 139.20, 25%, 2, 1

 

 

I will add however that I do think that the blue horse would be an epic worth while job to break the horizon limits for :)

Steve

Hi Florent and Steve, 

Just my 1 cents worth on your reply Steve.

I think we can agree that anything low in the sky will suffer from the relatively poorer atmospheric conditions, so as a consequence ideally ought to be taken at as high an elevation as possible. 

Would it be worth being a bit more specific Steve by taking into consideration a few more criteria, to avoid requests to lower the limit unnecessarily. 

As an extremely rough guide I would request for anything below a declination of -12° to have the horizon limits lowered. That is anything that doesn't rise above an elevation of approximately 40° at the site. Around the time of transit this could give upto an additional hour of imaging time.

That alone however is too simplistic as other things need to be factored in.

The total integration time, particularly a mosaic. A long time would favour a lowering of the horizon limits.

Is it a broadband target? With the number of days restricted by the moon, then again a request to lower the horizon limits would be a good idea.

 

Splitting a target into 2 jobs, broadband and narrowband, is something I'd do. The exception might be if only Ha was required. Jobs for individual filters definitely not recommended except for testing. 

Cheers, 

Ray 

 

 

Afternoon Ray, to be specific we have horizon limits in place that the whole software along with moon avoidance is based upon and works with. Many months ago on Pier-1 we had the issue with a multitude of ultra low jobs being put in and when high up jobs were not getting done I bore the brunt of the grumblings so after much conversation between us as well as forum posts with the members we decided then to stick to the horizon limits in place (per pier) as our imaging software algorithms had set math in place to work with and we were not throwing ultra low curve balls at it all the time with different parameters.

In fact its at the top of every pier is  a sticky referring to this. To be fair the piers are now being very productive and working very well under the new system.

We of course understand specials and customers wanting to do almost unattainable objects LOL We obviously try to accommodate our members where we can and work together, however I don't fancy a repeat of last year which is why we put all the limits and how to use the pier crib sheet in place at the time.

So yes an occasional on the floor job is OK especially during the productive seasons but as the norm its a no from me I am afraid. I do hope you all take this as me looking out for your imaging interests with the pier rather than being a spoil sport  :)

HTH

Steve

Hi Florent and Steve, 

Just my 1 cents worth on your reply Steve.

I think we can agree that anything low in the sky will suffer from the relatively poorer atmospheric conditions, so as a consequence ideally ought to be taken at as high an elevation as possible. 

Would it be worth being a bit more specific Steve by taking into consideration a few more criteria, to avoid requests to lower the limit unnecessarily. 

As an extremely rough guide I would request for anything below a declination of -12° to have the horizon limits lowered. That is anything that doesn't rise above an elevation of approximately 40° at the site. Around the time of transit this could give upto an additional hour of imaging time.

That alone however is too simplistic as other things need to be factored in.

The total integration time, particularly a mosaic. A long time would favour a lowering of the horizon limits.

Is it a broadband target? With the number of days restricted by the moon, then again a request to lower the horizon limits would be a good idea.

Splitting a target into 2 jobs, broadband and narrowband, is something I'd do. The exception might be if only Ha was required. Jobs for individual filters definitely not recommended except for testing. 

Cheers, 

Ray 

Hello all 

 

i propose to launch a 2 pane mosaic of the blue horsenebula

 

it is very low on the horizon , max at 32degre .  Steve , is ti possible ? 

i assume that orienation is still 90degre for the camera ? 

last year Ophiu nebula was done so i think it is ok 

 

i propose to first launch L data to test and then rgb 

 

florent

Pane, RA, DEC, Position Angle (East), Pane width (arcmins), Pane height (arcmins), Overlap, Row, Column
Pane 1, 16hr 18' 12", -19º 29' 36", 90.00, 211.20, 139.20, 25%, 1, 1
Pane 2, 16hr 10' 48", -19º 29' 36", 90.00, 211.20, 139.20, 25%, 2, 1

 

 

Hi everyone

Give or take a small amount the camera is the same, I rotate by eye so its never exact :) That job is possible no problem but don't put to many jobs in that low if you can, please state use 20º horizon limits for this one in the notes area :)

Did you all see my message about a trip with a new jig in a few weeks ?

Please just place as one job as its causing Pete way more work behind the scenes as you have started separating filters into individual jobs. This is OK with a quick "test" job but a logistical nightmare if you want to separate a full LRGBHOS job into individual submissions per filter on an ongoing basis.

Steve

I like it too!

Hello Florent, 

That is am intriguing image you attached. Just wonder how close I'll manage to get it to look like that. Submit it early and it should get more than enough time.

Thanks for the suggestion. 

Cheers, 

Ray 

I like it. Nice target

witj the attachement :