From my PN to do list.
This is
The definitive version from Doug. 40+ hours.
Gary Imm also has a nice version in his Kohoutek Group. He invested 5h and has a nice write-up that explains that this is definitely a PN despite some claims to the contrary.
The chances of my getting 40 hours on this next to San Francisco are pretty slim, but I had a very useful insight from
@David Payne on one of his
images where he used drizzling. I did not think it could help with the ZWO ASI6200 small pixels that invariably over-sampled. However, David pointed out that in the humid conditions we share our data may in fact be operationally under-sampled, hence a candidate for drizzling.
Nothing like a few facts to possibly shed light on the discussion. Drizzling took 40m on my Ryzen high end processor for >60GB of working memory. Comparing the standard versus the drizzle, the drizzle does look better and I can see better the little ring at the bottom. The star count on the regular was about 800 but 900 on the drizzle. To me this 12% increase in number of stars is significant.
Anyway, time to move on to another target but I think I have found a new weapon in my fight against fog.
PS Gary and others may be interested in this highly stretched image showing some weird ?gas jets on the two opposite sides of the nebula... better cut down on the Jack Daniels maybe.
Comments