Jump to content

Stargazers Lounge Uses Cookies

Like most websites, SGL uses cookies in order to deliver a secure, personalised service, to provide social media functions and to analyse our traffic. Continued use of SGL indicates your acceptance of our cookie policy.

sgl_imaging_challenge_banner_beauty_night_skies.thumb.jpg.2711ade15e31d01524e7dc52d15c4217.jpg

x6gas

Members
  • Content Count

    2,723
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    2

x6gas last won the day on July 13 2013

x6gas had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

847 Excellent

About x6gas

  • Rank
    Brown Trousers

Contact Methods

  • Website URL
    http://www.ir-astro.com

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    Oxfordshire
  1. That's a very nice image. Why don't you experiment processing your data using just the five filters and see if you like the results? Plenty of lovely HOO images out there... I must admit that I had the same issue and got fed up with constantly having to change the filter carousel; I always seemed to have the wrong filters on the rig so in the end I bit the bullet and upgraded to a seven filter wheel and i am really pleased I did...
  2. Thanks Goran. I did apply some gentle high pass sharpening in Photoshop but I didn't want to overcook it so it's interesting that you think I could have gone further. I think when I reprocess the data I'll stretch it less and see if I can sharpen it more... I used to have a number of PS techniques in my toolbox that I think would have helped with this image so I probably need to dust those off and relearn them. There are also some 'actions' that I used to use regularly that I also didn't deploy here. The OIII data is a bit soft but the Ha is good so I may also try making a false luminance and using that for the sharpening. I'm finding the hardest thing to get back into is getting a feel for what the data is telling you about how to process it. Something that Olly, and Sara, and Barry, and others do so well... Thanks again, Ian
  3. You're very kind mate. Ain't true, but you're very kind. I honestly can't believe how much I've forgotten about processing in Photoshop, but it is coming back... And then there's learning PI which at the moment is just following recipes without really knowing why or what you're doing but I am sure it'll make sense one day!
  4. Very nice. really dynamic rendition.
  5. <smashyandnicey>Wise words, mate!</smashyandnicey> Thanks Martin - appreciate the comments especially since it was your primers that started me on the imaging journey! I do know what you mean about the green... All this feedback is helpful and I'll take it in to consideration when I reprocess the data. Thanks again, Ian
  6. Thanks Martin. Fair points, and I always welcome constructive criticism; it's the only way we improve. I don't really like inky black backgrounds - especially on images of emission nebulae - but I think maybe you are right and I could have brought the contrast up a bit and the brightness down a bit... or do you think I've just overstretched the data? I must admit that the workflow I followed in PI applied the pre-canned standard stretch to the data and I do think it was a tad more than I'd usually go. I promise not to push out a million versions but is this reduction in stars and tweak to the contrast and brightness an improvement? I'm still [re-]finding my feet in terms of processing...
  7. Many thanks Kinch. Following something like my old PS workflow I found that the data got noisy very quickly. I'm not sure if that was something to do with using PI for the calibration and I will go back and reprocess the whole data set using my old workflow to see if there is a difference. I think I can do a much better job on the PI version, though, if I'm less aggressive in the background noise reduction steps... Thanks again, Ian
  8. I managed to get three clear nights on Sh2-101, the Tulip Nebula in Cygnus. This is a narrowband image in the Hubble palette and I was pleased to catch a bit of the curved shock front created by the microquasar Cygnus-X1 in the top centre. I'm still trying to get back up to speed on processing after a long break and I am also [still] trying to learn Pixinsight… I'd had trouble with calibration and in particular overcorrection of my flats but I now seem to have a workflow that delivers decent result (whether they are better than my usual process in AstroArt 5.0 I'm not sure!). Anyway, this was interesting for me as I processed the calibrated data in both PS and PI. I was following AmyAstro's YouTube tutorial for the latter and massively overdid the noise reduction which meant that the image had that characteristic shot-through-Vaseline look. The PS version was a bit too noisy and I wasn't that keen on that either. I was going to go back and redo the PI process (and I am sure I will) but I blended the two and this is the result which I like a lot better than either of the originals! Kit - Mount: CEM40; Scope: Tak FSQ85; Camera: Atik 460ex; Filters: Astrodon; Guiding: Atik OAG, QHY5L II, PHD2 Data - 35 x 600s each of Ha, OIII, and SII for a total integration of 18 hours calibrated with Bias, Darks (which I never usually bother with), and Flats. And since I tend to leave a bit too much green in my images for many, here's the version after HLVG:
  9. My concern with a metal pier is that they ring like a bell. No problem in an obsy, I presume, where it is protected from the wind and accidental bangs or you can fill it with sand or something else to dampen it. If you are decided on a metal pier then it all depends on whether you can find someone reasonable to fabricate it up for you. If you have mates handy with a welder or a friendly garage mechanic then it can be done quite inexpensively but if you go to fabricator I think you'll find you won't save a great deal - but you do get it made to your own spec, of course... Powder coating it alone would cost £50-75 quid at my local place (though I've no idea how that compares).
  10. I made mine; I've been very happy with it, it doesn't offend the wife too much and it was pretty easy to do. I poured the base and pier of mine in one piece. Dug a 75cm cube hole, 3/4 filled with concrete, set a 1.5 meter length of 6" round air conditioning ducting in it filled the tube with concrete and topped off the base. The tube has 6 x 1m lengths of threaded rod it in with long hex nuts on the top set into the concrete so presents six mounting holes for a top plate. The hardest part of the job was making a wooden former to ensure the correct orientation of the bolts / keep the threaded rod in the right place.
  11. That's true. I need to figure out the interplay of the horizontal orientation of the scopes as you point out and the off-centre impact that @Laurin Dave mentioned... I guess I could just chuck it on the mount and take some measurements rather than trying to calculate it... Thanks for the reply!
  12. Of course! That makes perfect sense... but makes it much harder to judge what would work. My measurement / memory / typing were wrong and the actual width of the dual scopes is 400mm not 500mm as I originally posted so there is a bit more relief (the other measurement included bits of the bar which obviously doesn't matter). Can really use a shorter bar as I need to accommodate the motorised focuser and allow for full rotation of the filter wheel...
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.