09-01-2017 02:02 PM
That would probably have to be my Andromeda galaxy image (though a few others are probably in the running).
This required several hours of work to capture the data... and then once I had all the data it would be several weeks worth of work to process the data into this image. This is actually my third iteration of re-processing the data ... having made some serious mistakes when doing my first two attempts. We are own worst critics... so it turns out I'm aware of some flaws in how I processed this version that most non-astrophotographers might never notice (even many other astrophotographers might not notice)... so it makes me want to re-process the data for a 4th iteration (but it was a lot of work so this isn't something I'd approach lightly.)
Similar things could be said of some of my eclipse images... some of my eclipse images of the corona during totality were similarly difficult ... but party due to the rare nature of the event (and me being a nervous wreck trying to make sure that absoultely everything went perfectly in the hours and hours of working trying to set up all the gear (equatorial tracking mounts, telescopes, cameras, computer control to handle the timing and exposure of each shot, all the testing and re-testing in the months prior to the eclipse, etc.) Once the eclipse happened and it was all on auto-pilot, it seems like my Andromeda image was "more work" but I suppose it was really just a different kind of work.
I'm not quite done processing the data in the eclipse images to come up with a final result that I really like. So who knows if I might change my mind about "the most difficult shot I took" until I'm done.