Gina

Still nothing even auto-stretched in PI. Moving on then... Heart & Soul next...

Collected 30 2m SII subs g600 -30C NAN and decided to see if IC1396 had any SII nebulosity. Can't see anything with same settings as NAN so trying 4m subs.

One advantage of higher gain is that the read noise is reduced. Sounds counter-intuitive I know but that's what the ZWO graph says. Of course thermal noise increase but so does the signal. This seems to be saying the using maximum gain is beneficial on weak targets. Takes a while to get one's head round these new CMOS sensors

Here's a comparison of 2m and 4m with gain of 600. The 2m one has better stars.

Gain of 600 brings in a bit more of the image but I think I prefer the 500 version so I've gone back to that. Here's a screenshot of both gains, auto-stretched. Might try g600 with 120s.

Maybe something starting to show but I don't want to go to much more than 4-5m or I'll start to get oval stars. Instead I've increased gain from 500 to the maximum of 600 and see if anything shows then.

Trying SII on the NAN but nothing to see with 120s = 2m subs so I'm trying 240s = 4m and see if anything shows

Dark now and the stars are out. Checked focus and the difference from the tree was just one count. Seeing causes variation around 2 or 3 counts so it's a matter of watching and adjusting focus for the overall tightest pixel pattern at 400% zoom in SharpCap. At that zoom individual pixels are visible. Next to sort out a target. NAN is currently at the zenith but I've done that except in SI where I couldn't see any image. Might just try that again.

In that case I would recommend going straight for the 3nm Ha filter rather than trying to save some funds by going for 5nm first like I did. The difference is significant and seems far greater than you would expect from changing from 5 to 3. At least I didn't buy the 5nm OIII Ha definitely brings out the most nebulosity as hydrogen is more prevalent than oxygen or sulphur (I'm stuck in the mud and refuse to use the "f" version ). Adding OIII give you a colour rendition and works quite well for most DSOs. SII is far less useful and most DSOs seem to have very little SII - still worth buying the 3nm version though so that the stars match up. Where available the SII brings out extra detail and more colours if you use the Hubble palette.

Ah yes. I too would like to automate focussing and that is something I plan to do but in the meantime my remote manual focussing works pretty well with my own DIY remote focuser. The control software was developed for a triple imaging rig which I've pretty much given up on so the focuser selector is redundant. I haven't bothered to alter the control software as the current version works well enough. Here is a screenshot of the observatory laptop via TeamViewer showing the tree on a far hill that I use to set focus up roughly ready for night-time use. It's about a mile away and I find this gives a good starting point. SharpCap is set at 200% and rig slewed such that the top of the tree is central in the FOV. My "Triple Remote Focussing System" window can be seen in front of the SharpCap window and as can be seen the focus hasn't changed much(Focus Count of 1).

If you have light pollution you need narrowband filters. They don't have to be the very best and most expensive - I've seen lots of good results with Baader filters. No idea how good the ZWO filters are - don't even know what they do. I'll stick with what I've got unless I hear of anyone doing better ones at little cost One good thing about the ASI1600MM-cool is that you can use 1.25" filters without worrying about vignetting (particularly with the filters close to the camera as with the ZWO filter wheel). If you want a suggestion I would recommend trying the Baader 7nm Ha filter - cheap and cheerful Good for a start if you're short of cash. I know Baader 1.25" filters fit the ZWO filter wheel - I use their LRGB filters.

Right - imaging rig back on mount and ready to go except that I'll have to check focus. Probably re-do the flats too. I reckon to re-do flats after moving the rig off the mount and back on.

I have imaged Simeis 147 before but the FOV was a bit lacking. And so was the camera resolution (460EX mono). I think my new rig could improve on previous results

I think the difference is that you're using a wideband filter - very wide - and I'm using a very narrowband filter - Ha 3nm Astrodon. Now that is quite some filter - best in the business I gather, and not cheap - almost half the price of the camera but "boy it gives results". I've spent more on the filters than the ASI1600MM-Cool. Yes, I'm going for imaging the Flaming Star Nebula tonight - it looks a very interesting object and well worth a good go at. I may have time to try Simeis 147 too - I'll see how it goes.

Tried extreme histogram stretch in Photoshop but there is indeed absolutely nothing there! Been thinking about things and I think Barnard's Loop can wait a bit - Orion is too low in the SE until late at night ATM and there seems to be "good pickings" at the present FOV. I've already taken the imaging rig off the mount to change lenses but I can easily put it back without changing lenses. I think that's what I'll do. The 135mm lens is a really good one and does seem to give better results than the 28mm.

Thanks again Ken and gives me pause for thought Took 31 Ha subs of Orion from the Flame Nebula to M42 last night. BPP failed to register a couple leaving 29 which it seemed fine but when I came to look at the result there was nothing there except a cluster of dots where M42 should be , seems the M42 data got rejected but I don't know where the rest went.

I thought I recognised the main DSO in the image The FOV seems to be rather nice for this DSO This is one I haven't imaged before - one of dozens no doubt

Thanks Ken I should have guessed that PixInsight could have given me the answer I sure do have a lot to learn But I enjoy learning so that's alright

Lots of imaging data to analyse from last night, including some alternatives from the main runs on IC1396 and IC443. A quick look at Orion and a search for Simeis 147 which I'm keen to have a go at. Here's a first look... Just 10 120s Ha subs for identification. Could be Simeis 147 in the top left corner - must check my FOV scale. 135mm f2.5 lens - 433m x 335m = 7.2° x 5.6° - Simeis 147 is said to be 3° diameter approx. so that's not it - image is far too small. I'm changing lens to 28mm f3.5 for tonight with the main plan of capturing Barnard's Loop etc. in Orion but until that comes into view I can explore other areas.

Downloaded the hundred odd OIII subs of IC1396 and checked them in Blink - 115 brewed down to 107. Now in BPP.

I shall go on collecting OIII subs and maybe it will add up to a useful amount of image data. Tomorrow night is foirecast to clear and I'm planning to swap lenses for a shorter focal length one, maybe 28mm and move over to Orion and capture Barnard's Loop etc.

IC443 18 OIII subs processed in BPP and histogram stretched in Gimp - there is something there - just! Can just make out a bit of the head of the Jelly Fish.

And here's a screenshot of the integrated SII result for the H&S stretched a bit in GIMP.

Here is a single OIII IC1396 sub greatly histogram stretched.

Now processing 80 SII H&S subs in BPP. There are faint but noticeable images in these subs. Two dozen 120s OIII subs of IC 1396 captured so far and continuing...