[AZ-Observing] Re: 17/P Holmes Annular or Not?
- From: Jeremy Perez <jeremy@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: az-observing@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Sun, 28 Oct 2007 16:14:02 -0700
That's a great analysis Tom! It's funny, I had done the same thing,
but by measuring from another photographer's image (I was waiting for
his permission to post the image). That rough analysis confirms what
you noted -- that the annular appearance is an illusion. I guess that
plateau in brightness fools the eye and brain into seeing weaker
luminosity perhaps because we expect the increase in brightness to be
more steady? It is a fascinating illusion though.
I've got those measurements (minus the reference image) charted here:
http://www.perezmedia.net/beltofvenus/archives/000745.html
Jeremy
On Oct 28, 2007, at 2:22 PM, Tom Polakis wrote:
> In all of the views through the eyepiece, I have been convinced
> that there is a weak, thick ring structure to the main, bright
> disc. Properly exposed images suggest a ring as well. In this
> image by Jim Cormier...
>
> http://media.skyandtelescope.com/images/Holmes-1.jpg
>
> ...the disc appears to be brighter from the edge inward to about
> 80% radius, then fainter inward to 50% before becoming very
> bright. That's a ring, right?
>
> Last night I overcame my fear of through-the-telescope imaging, and
> put my 20D on my TV101 refractor. An exposure of 10 seconds at ISO
> 400 was about right to begin to show the outer halo and just barely
> not saturate the core. That image again showed to my eyes what
> appears to be a ring.
>
> Lacking any proper image analysis software, I used brute force in
> Photoshop, and measured a 3x3 average pixel value in the three
> color channels along a horizontal slice passing through the center
> of the nebula. They are plotted above my image of the comet here.
>
> http://members.cox.net/tpolakis/astro/holmes_photometry_20071028.jpg
>
> If it were really a ring, there would be a dip in the brightness
> curve as you approach the center. In fact, there is only a change
> in slope (on the east side only) before it becomes steep again. So
> it appears that it is not really a ring, and there is some sort of
> illusion at play. It seems to have a lot to do with the very
> bright core. I wonder how many times I have called planetary
> nebulae with bright central stars rings due to the same illusion.
>
> As I have already heard a couple times, "don't believe everything
> you see."
>
> Tom
> --
> See message header for info on list archives or unsubscribing, and
> please
> send personal replies to the author, not the list.
>
--
See message header for info on list archives or unsubscribing, and please
send personal replies to the author, not the list.
- Follow-Ups:
- [AZ-Observing] Re: 17/P Holmes Annular or Not?
- From: Jeremy Perez
- References:
- [AZ-Observing] 17/P Holmes Annular or Not?
- From: Tom Polakis
Other related posts:
- » [AZ-Observing] 17/P Holmes Annular or Not?
- » [AZ-Observing] Re: 17/P Holmes Annular or Not?
- » [AZ-Observing] Re: 17/P Holmes Annular or Not?
- » [AZ-Observing] Re: 17/P Holmes Annular or Not?
- » [AZ-Observing] Re: 17/P Holmes Annular or Not?
- [AZ-Observing] Re: 17/P Holmes Annular or Not?
- From: Jeremy Perez
- [AZ-Observing] 17/P Holmes Annular or Not?
- From: Tom Polakis