data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/8f6ce/8f6ced2a59206c9971daf1c60240a41a365b0bed" alt=""
Figure 1 – The Horsehead Nebula, Barnard 33, Celestron Origin, a 60 min, 360 frame exposure. (c) DEWolf 2025.
Today I’d like to continue our tour of the Orion Molecular Cloud Complex with the Horsehead Nebula or Barnard 33. It is one of my all time favorites, indeed the favorite of many people. Figure 1 is an image that I took of it with my Celestron Origin, a 60 min, 360 frame exposure. You can see it clearly positioned close to the Flame Nebula
The Horsehead Nebula is a dark nebula, which means it is a dense cloud of gas and dust that obscures the light from stars and other objects behind it. Within this complex, the Horsehead Nebula stands out due to its distinct shape, which is formed by a dense, cold cloud of dust and gas. It spans about 3,000 light-years in length, with the Horsehead itself measuring about 1,500 times the size of our Solar System.
Despite being a dark nebula, the Horsehead is illuminated by the nearby star Alnitak, which is part of the Orion Belt. The radiation from Alnitak causes the surrounding gas to glow, contributing to the nebula’s glowing red appearance in many photographs. The Horsehead Nebula owes its distinctive shape to the way light interacts with the dust and gas in the region. The Horsehead silhouette is formed by a thick concentration of dust and gas that casts a shadow on the glowing emission nebula behind it. This shadowy region is particularly dense, blocking much of the light from the stars and other gas clouds in the area, and giving it its signature look.
In photos, you often see the Horsehead Nebula in a striking combination of red and black. The reddish hue comes from the ionized hydrogen gas in the nebula, which glows under the influence of ultraviolet light from nearby stars. The dark, black shape of the nebula contrasts with the glowing gas, making it appear almost like an otherworldly creature—hence the name “Horsehead.”
Within the nebula, there are regions of intense gravitational collapse, where the dust and gas are coming together to form protostars. These protostars are still in their early stages of development, but they are the building blocks of future stars.
The Horsehead Nebula was first noticed in the early 20th century. However, its “discovery” wasn’t as a result of visual observation with the naked eye, but rather through photographic techniques that were becoming more advanced during that time.
The nebula was first photographed in 1888 by the American astronomer Edward Emerson Barnard, who is often credited with its discovery. Barnard was one of the pioneers in using long-exposure photography to capture celestial objects, and it was this technique that allowed him to detect the faint, dark nebula in the Orion Molecular Cloud. And it was long exposure that was key to contrasting dark regions against faint brighter ones.
Indeed, we can consider Figure 2, which is an 18 min exposure that I took with my Seestar 50s. This image required considerable image processing using Topaz Camera AI and even so is a little fuzzy or noisy. With the Seestar I find that the images benefit from three processes: sharpening, denoising, and upscaling, where the AI increases the number of pixels and fills them in.
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/b7001/b7001b4d8d7b7a4c871b1e910bdcfa7fad783a11" alt=""
Figure 2 – Horsehead Nebula Seestar 50s 18 min exposure (c) DEWolf 2024
Basically, I think that you will agree that Figure 2 is less distinct and sharp than Figure 1. This begins a not so much complicated as subtle and shaded discussion of signal-to-noise. But let me just concentrate here on the issue of signal. After all the famous signal-to-noise ratio is brightness divided by something. How much brighter is the Celestron Origin than the Seestar 50s.
I heard in a YouTube tutorial that it was about 25 x brighter and I wondered where that came from. (This little mathematical calculation is for those of you who care!).
Suppose that the flux at the surface of the telescope objective is X (Watts/in2) then
(Light collected by Origin/light collected by Seestar) = X (5.982-2.482)/X 22 = 7.40.
This is because, Origin has a 5.98 ” objective and the camera occludes a 2.48 ” circle, while the Seestar has a 2 ” objective.
Next, we have the collection efficiency inside the telescope which is determined from the solid angle
(Collection eff. Origin/Collection eff. Seestar)=(f/#Seestar/f/#Origin)2 =(5/2.2)2 = 5.17
Finally, we have to consider that ratio of light collected by an Origin pixels to that collected by a Seestar pixel. This is given by the ratio of the areas of the two pixels
(Pixel Collection Origin/Pixel Collection Seestar) = (2.4 um x 2.4 um)/(2.9 um x 2.9 um) = .685
Thus, the brightness ratio = .685 x 5.17 x 7.40 = 26. You heard it here first! Typically with my Seestar 50s I would take something like a 26 min exposure. You can capture this many photons in 1 min with the Celestron Origin. Astrophotography is a game of how many photons you can collect.