Jump to content

sgl_imaging_challenge_2021_annual.thumb.jpg.3fc34f695a81b16210333189a3162ac7.jpg

Dann

Members
  • Posts

    270
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Dann

  1. Evening everyone, Lucky enough to take delivery of my first ever dedicated astro camera yesterday (2600mc pro) Amazingly it's clear tonight so I'm working things out and doing some tests. I have a question about the histogram as it looks quite different to how it appeared when using my DSLR. I usually stick to 300sec exposures and when using my DSLR this moved the peak of the data in from the left by a good margin, 20% or more depending on the moon phase. However as you can see from this screenshot the histogam peak on a 300sec exposure with my new camera appears in APT to be clipping the black point as it's against the left hand side. Is this the case, am I interpreting this correctly? Any adjustments I should be making? I currently have the gain set to 100 with an offset of 50. The second histogram is a 600sec exposure with the same settings. Thanks all
  2. Very nice, is that up in Capel le Ferne on top of the cliffs? I live in Folkestone and have family in Capel, keep meaning to try the Milky Way from up there.
  3. Dann

    First post

    Hi Geordie john, Welcome to SGL.
  4. Hi all, A few weeks back I did something a little silly. I was behind the mount in the 'looking through the polar scope' position, the guide scope looked out of alignment with the main OTA and thought I would give it a little adjustment. Thinking I had hold of the guide scope with one hand I loosened the thumb screws and the guide scope and camera slid out and hit me right in the throat, bounced off quite nicely. Thankfully it was only a ZWO mini guide scope and camera. Felt a bit bruised for a few days and no harm done but it got me thinking. Anyone else happy to share any astronomy related mishaps and injuries? I'm sure they're quite common seeing as we fiddle around in the darkness
  5. Hi all, (UPDATE: Astrobin have contacted me to help resolve, they think it may be a bug specific to my hardware/upload options. Happy to hear it's only an isolated thing.) I've looked for information on this else where but haven't been able to find anything. Whenever I upload an image to Astrobin it always appears to add a slight blur to it, removing a lot of the finer detail. In fact I can see it happening, if I click on an image in someone's profile I briefly see it nice and crisp before being blurred a second later. This happens with all of my own images and it's annoying to share links with friends/family only for their first impression to be a blurred image. Anyone else experience this? Clicking on the image to enlarge it solves the problem but I find it quite disappointing when first scrolling through my gallery and seeing them like that. First impressions and all that. There is lots of information out there regarding how to maintain quality when uploading to social media but nothing I can find for Astrobin. I didn't expect a dedicated astrophotography site to do this but I guess some sort of compression is being applied? Does anyone know a way of avoiding this? Is there an optimum aspect ratio, resolution, file format etc for Astrobin uploads or am I missing a trick? Thanks in advance Danny
  6. Hi all, I feel like this is probably something I'll find out for myself and maybe a silly question but providing its clear tonight I'll most likely be performing my first meridian flip in combination with plate solving in APT. Once passed the meridian my intention was to slew away to a bright star (something already past the meridian), check focus and then use a previous sub and APT's GOTO plate solving feature to slew back onto target. My question, will APT be able to identify the target is past the meridian and plate solve using what effectively will be an inverted image when compared to the new desired position, or will it just slew me back to where I was to begin with (pre flip)? I know APT has an automatic meridian flip feature but I haven't really had a chance to look at that yet. Thanks
  7. Welcome Alex, I'm from Folkestone and have a similar setup to yourself. Happy to help anyway I can.
  8. 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.
  9. 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
  10. 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.
  11. Dann

    Iris

    Thats fantastic, the processing is great. DSLR images like this inspire me to practice.
  12. 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.
  13. Same here Ian, so much for 10% cloud cover :-)
  14. I haven't imaged it myself but I have a thing for the Rosette Nebula. I just think it looks spectacular.
  15. Always interesting to watch these Mick. Especially tonight, the weather man has lied to me this evening. Lets hope it clears up
  16. 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?
  17. 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
  18. 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.
  19. Good advise Lewis, I had never thought of processing the same data twice and blending them together.
  20. 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
  21. Great processsing, I love how you have brought the detail out in the ice
  22. This is easily the most detailed image I have seen of this, love it!
  23. Thanks. I have just found this: It may now be better for you to consider a filter removal rather than a replacement if you own a dual filter camera, i.e., 400D, 450D, 500D, 550D, 40D, 50D, 1000D or 1100D. Blocking UV and IR light. In a dual filter camera, the front filter blocks UV and IR light with a very sharp cut off at the edges of the visible spectrum. This is information that has come to light recently when a well known filter manufacturer tested these filters after noting that they blocked IR light. The filter blocks UV and IR very effectively and is of very high quality. This means that no second filter is required to block UV and IR and the Baader filter would not do a better job. Reading above I take it that I won’t require the UV/IR blocking from the CCD CLS version and can go for the cheaper standard one? Forgive me for maybe asking silly questions but it always nice to check with someone else before possibly buying the wrong thing :-)
  24. Howdy More of a question about filters than cameras but this is probably the best place for it. I’m treating myself to an astro modified 1100D, most probably pre modified by Astronomiser and I would like to grab a CLS clip filter for it. The camera will be purely for astro use so ill just be having the filter removed. I believe the 1100D has two stock filters, one of which already blocks UV/IR? Can anyone confirm that and if that’s the case will I just need the standard CLS filter or will I be better off with the CCD CLS version? Thanks
  25. Thanks all, I might have a go at getting everything to talk to each other tonight if I can find a serial/USB converter.
×
×
  • 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.