hey - i'm not attacking you. you've just misunderstood. when you get more experience in the hobby you'll understand that in order to get an equivalent SNR out of a target from bortle 8 as from bortle 3, you'll need to spend many, many more hours on the target. i don't remember what the ratios are like anymore, but for me, here in bortle 8, i have to put 10 hours on a target (per channel!) to get what you might expect from maybe 1-2 hours in bortle 3. and somehow that's what the image looks like to me. i didn't mean to imply that you are lying about where you live or what you did...
for bortle 3, after 10 hours, i'd expect a lot more signal. that's all. this might mean that your gain/offset is not right. or maybe the subexposures are too short for the particular gain/offset. or it may indicate something wrong with the camera. or maybe that camera just has a low QE... or it may indicate that nothing's wrong at all, and i have misanalyzed the situation. all i can say is i have 12+ years experience with astrophotography and have seen a lot... a lot... of images of the pelican nebula, and taken a lot of them myself from bortle 8 and bortle 3.
rob