Just to give an update, I have ordered a "Planetarium" filter on eBay from a business in China, that has a very good satisfaction rating. The price is a little over $38 delivered to my home. It has no markings on it, but there is a very good explanation about what light it will filter out and says it is "similar" to the Baader Planetarium Moon and Sky Glow Filter. The only drawback is its 2 to 4 week delivery time. This in not a delay on the part of the shipper, since it was shipped the day after I ordered it. (Must be coming on that proverbial slow boat!)
As a bit of explanation for those advising to go to a dark site, for health, stamina, and work reasons that I will not go into, I have a total astronomical activity limit normally of about 90 minutes, with an absolute limit of 120 minutes. If I went to my astronomy club's site, I would drive for an hour turn around and drive back home. If I went to another site, which is often used by drug people, I could drive there, set up my scope, allow it to cool for 30 minutes, pack it up, and drive back home. By back yard is the only place where can I truly enjoy astronomy,until I can retire from work.
From my back yard, most of the close (within a half mile) light pollution is either from yard lights, or low temperature sodium street lights. The modifications I have made to the scope, privacy fencing, a hood over my head, seem to obliterate stray light from yard lights. My back yard neighbor can now turn on his four sealed beam flood lights and I see absolutely no affect in the view. If the filter can do anything with low sodium light, then I should be able to locate a significant number of additional galaxies....at least I hope so.
Increasing magnification does help contrast, which helps see nebulous things better, but anything greater than about 100X with this 130mm scope starts look surrealistic to me in a dark field and is not enjoyable. This condition may change after I have cataract surgery. Additionally, reducing the field of view to maybe two-thirds of a degree is unacceptable for searching purposes, in my opinion. That small of a field might be fine with a computerized scope, but not with a manual one. I consider an attempt to selectively reduce the level of unwanted colors of light and do the best I can at keeping the light with information and a wide field of view is the logical and most reasonable attempt that I can make to see these objects.
For me, I am thinking a 1.25 inch eyepiece in the 14 to 25 mm focal length, with as wide an AFOV as I have available to me, with this 130 mm f/5 scope, using a selective reducing filter is the most reasonable option to try from my back yard. Why the 130 mm scope? It is the largest truly introductory scope that I own and I think it stands a better chance of seeing galaxies and other dim things in my light pollution that any of the smaller ones.
I will let you know how successful I am when I get the filter.
Thank you for all of your thoughts and opinions.