Jump to content

Banner.jpg.b83b14cd4142fe10848741bb2a14c66b.jpg

First ever solar white light image, 1st September

JamesF

By JamesF
in Imaging - Solar

Recommended Posts

JamesF

JamesF

Posted
Posted

Ok, so not literally my first, but not that far off either, and the first that I'm prepared to share :) This was taken on 1st September with my 450D using my 127 Mak, 60 frames of 1/1000th second stacked in Registax 5 and tweaked in Photoshop. I stacked the JPG images because I've not been able to get Registax to handle the TIFF files I created from the RAW images yet.

Feedback welcome. Appreciated, even. It was actually more challenging than I expected and I'm quite pleased with how it has turned out for an early attempt.

solar-3-processed-small.png

James

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Steve Ward

Steve Ward

Posted
Posted

Can't see much to criticise there James . . . :p . . .that's a cracking image ,

Colour's a personal thing , I prefer to shoot in Mono because that's what I see through the EP visually , but I've always been an awkward so 'n' so...... :evil:

You'll soon be tearing around chasing tiny patches of blue along with Roger and myself . . . . :grin:

Steve.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
JamesF

JamesF

Posted
  • Author
Posted

Can't see much to criticise there James . . . :p . . .that's a cracking image ,

Colour's a personal thing , I prefer to shoot in Mono because that's what I see through the EP visually , but I've always been an awkward so 'n' so...... :evil:

You'll soon be tearing around chasing tiny patches of blue along with Roger and myself . . . . :grin:

Steve.

It was Roger's guide I was following, so I thought I'd give it a whirl and change the colours as he suggests as well. Once I've done a few I'll compare them with the uncoloured ones and see what I prefer. I quite like that the colour seems to bring out the granulation of the surface a bit more, but that might be down to the quality of my monitor...

Strange you should mention chasing patches of blue sky. I was pondering the other day on perhaps combining an obsy with an office and moving out of the house to work so that I could set off imaging runs in between working :)

James

Link to comment
Share on other sites
JamesF

JamesF

Posted
  • Author
Posted

Thank you Roger :)

I've actually just come in from digging up some spuds for dinner and noticed a stonking great dust bunny near the limb between ten and eleven o'clock. More of a dust sheep, actually. I'll have to look into that.

James

Link to comment
Share on other sites
JamesF

JamesF

Posted
  • Author
Posted

Great job, you got everything right.

As for the stacking, I suggest you convert your RAWs to some non-lossy format before feeding them to Registax (when I was using my Nikon for imaging, I used to tweak the RAWs in RawTherapee first, then save them as PNGs).

Thank you. I tried converting the RAWs to TIFF, but Registax still didn't want to know. It didn't occur to me to try PNGs though, so I might give that another whirl. I think it's probably related to file size. Even converted to greyscale the TIFF files were quite large.

James

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Steve Ward

Steve Ward

Posted
Posted

Thank you Roger :)

I've actually just come in from digging up some spuds for dinner and noticed a stonking great dust bunny near the limb between ten and eleven o'clock. More of a dust sheep, actually. I'll have to look into that.

James

You don't have to include Rogers dust bunnies , they're not included in the tute. . . . :evil:

Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • 7 months later...
fwm891

fwm891

Posted
Posted

Hi James - not sure if you're still following this thread? if you are did you need a field flattener in the image train or 450D straight on the back of the MaK127. Just asking as I have just got a 127 and already have a 450D so it looks a good set-up. Scope only arrived today so not had chance to put a camera on it yet...

Link to comment
Share on other sites
JamesF

JamesF

Posted
  • Author
Posted

The camera is straight on the visual back, Francis. There's not actually a huge amount of space to play with. When the Sun is closest to the Earth the image I get is about 150 pixels short of the full frame height on the 450D. Moving the camera further back causes refocusing to increase the focal length slightly thus increasing the image size. Even adding 20mm to the optical path is probably enough to increase the focal length too much to fit the image in the frame any more.

If it helps, I have a couple of pictures of the setup here:

http://www.tanstaafl.co.uk/2012/09/solar-imaging-with-the-127-mak/

James

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue. By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.