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.



  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

10 Good


About Dann

  • Rank
    Star Forming

Profile Information

  • Location
    Kent, UK
  1. Thats a fantastic result from only an hour of exposure, the backgrounds a bit noisy on my monitor but its nothing a few more subs wont fix.
  2. I wasn’t going to share this as it doesn’t really stand up to the many fantastic M45 images on the forum. Although I have some spare time at work today so ill throw it up. I found this really challenging to process, especially getting rid of gradient without cutting out the nebulosity but this is as good as I could get it. Coma is a problem for me, especially with larger targets but a Skywatcher coma corrector is on the shopping list 14 x 300sec darks/flats/bias Ta
  3. I think it looks good, it shows how much is out there that we just cant see. How long were your subs? On my dodgy work monitor it looks like it might benefit from reducing the red in the shadows.
  4. Dann


    Thats fantastic, the processing is great. DSLR images like this inspire me to practice.
  5. Dann

    A grainy M33!

    Not a bad result Ags considering the length of your subs. M33 is pretty dim, I shot just a few 300sec subs of this when I was getting to grips with guiding and it was still pretty faint.
  6. Same here Ian, so much for 10% cloud cover :-)
  7. I haven't imaged it myself but I have a thing for the Rosette Nebula. I just think it looks spectacular.
  8. Always interesting to watch these Mick. Especially tonight, the weather man has lied to me this evening. Lets hope it clears up
  9. I kept looking at this at work and the more I looked the worse it got. This evening I spent a lot longer trying to process the stars and broom on different layers. Its far from amazing but I'm much happier with it now, its incredible how much difference processing can make. I think I have to do a dodgy process first so that I can work out what's wrong with it, I seem to have done that with all of my images so far. Anyone else the same?
  10. I was planning on 4 hours of exposure time for this as I wanted to try putting together an image taken over a few nights (not something I have tried yet) I couldn't resist processing what I already have. My processing has a lot to answer for, I was looking for something that might thin out the star field a little as I think it distracts from the Broom but I couldn't find a way. I'm quite pleased mind for my second guided image. Feel free to play and as always advise is appreciated 17 x 300sec @ ISO 800 8 darks (all I have at this temp at the moment) flats/bias
  11. It really depends on the focal length you are using, are you shooting through your scope or a camera lens? When I imaged unguided I used trial and error increasing until the stars start to become egg shaped and then drop it back down. If you plan on taking wide field shots of the night sky you will find you can get away with longer subs than with a higher focal length lens or scope without trailing.
  12. Good advise Lewis, I had never thought of processing the same data twice and blending them together.
  13. Congratulations, I’m glad you got it sorted. It’s a pain about your mounts port but at least there was a backup. A nice image to start with too, now you just need a few more subs and some calibration frames and your well on your way
  14. Great processsing, I love how you have brought the detail out in the ice
  15. This is easily the most detailed image I have seen of this, love it!
  • Create New...

Important Information

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