Hi Stan, I agree with you, the core is a little bit blown out. I made some correction (density mask on the core). I think it is better now. Congrats for youMessage 1 of 3 , Jul 8, 2012View SourceHi Stan,
I agree with you, the core is a little bit blown out. I made some correction (density mask on the core). I think it is better now.
Congrats for you high resolved images.
Let me known what you think about the new image.
--- In email@example.com, "Stan" <stan_ccd@...> wrote:
> --- "marcjousset" <mj.astro@> wrote:
> > http://www.astrosurf.com/jousset/images/deepsky/amas/cdk_stl/m13_cdk_120513_f.jpg
> > FWHM : 1,6 to 1,9"
> Hi Marc,
> The core is blown out in that display image so you might want to create a less saturated version in order to examine and compare resolution. Here are some benchmarks:
> FWHM = 1.6" (deconvolved to 1.3"):
> FWHM = 0.5" !!!:
> (second pic down)
> Globulars are excelent targets for hi-res.