Details:
Takahashi FSQ-106
Takahashi EM200
Canon 1000Da (modified for astrophotography), Hutech IDAS LPS
30 x 182 sec lights , ISO 1600 (27 darks, 40 bias) at 2009-11-20
FOV=96.87% of the original frame
Autoguiding with PHD, Toucam 740 , Celestron ED80
Alignment, calibration, stacking with DeepSkyStacker, final processing with PixInsight LE and PS3
It is difficult to say if there is a "true" color in any astroimage. A realistic answer could be "yes" and "no" simultaneously.
At the specific image the red color depicts the presence of Hydrogen (dominant element in the universe and responsible for star formation). But how much red or pink or purple the hydrogen areas should be in order for an image to be "true" enough? I can't answer to this, because it's somehow subjective. It depends of the sensitivity (or response) of camera's sensor at various wavelengths, use of narrowband filters (Ha, Hb for hydrogen, OIII for oxygen, SII for sulfur, attached within a filterwheel at dedicated astronomical CCD's) and of the processing steps that finally offer pleasure to our eyes.
The cameras I use for this type of shots are modified (IR/CUT filter replaced) in order to be more sensitive to the red color corresponding to hydrogen.
And yes, this kind of photography is quite hard :)
Explaining quickly the difficulty of the whole thing:
- Must have a very precise tracking mount
- Perfect optics
- Perfect calibration of the equipment, in software and hardware (balancing, polar alignment, auto-guiding, etc)
- Good weather (transparency), low temperatures, low relative humidity, low wind, etc
- Low light pollution (and moonless nights..)
- Careful preparation and planning of the targets to be photographed
- Succesfull processing of all the frames (lights, darks, bias, flats)
Add photograph to your favorites
Add photographer to your favorites
Photographer found comment helpful.