Xplode

To me it looks overprocessed and it's very easy to see the "vaseline" look from way too strong noise reduction, it's actually so bad there's "filaments" appearing all over the image that shouldn't be there.
I think you should start over try to use less processing steps, it should end up looking a lot better and more natural
Also remember that a lot of noise you can see at 100% resolution will be removed when you downsample an image. 

I'm sorry for the harsh comment, but in my opinion it's better to be a little harsh and help with constructive critisism than leave the standard unhelpfull "that's perfect/that's awesome" type of comments.

You have already found the best and easiest solution, tap holes in the top pier plate 😃
If you want to add sand or something in your pier remember to make a hole in the middle of the top plate.

One of the top 5 images i've seen of this.
If you're gonna try to improve it maybe add a little more redness?

This is a quick and dirty version of M31 done just to work out how to make a mosaic, it doesn't look too shabby for the small amount of data.

Telescope: AG Optical Convergent FA14 14.5" f/5
Mount: 10 Micron GM2000
Camera: Moravian G3-16200
Guiding: Moravian G3 OAG and ZWO ASI174mm Mini

The mosaic consists of 8 panels.

Frames per panel:
Astrodon B 50mm: 1x300" bin 1x1
Astrodon G 50mm: 1x300" bin 1x1
Astrodon L 50mm: 1x300" bin 1x1
Astrodon R 50mm: 1x300" bin 1x1
 

Time per panel: 20min
Total time: 2,67hours

I had some challenges with unevenness in RGB data as it was taken over several nights because M31 is so low right now.

There's of course not much color and lack of depth with so little data

Click on it to see full size (which is resized to 25% of original size)

LED works great, they work perfectly for NB too.

3 minutes ago, sloz1664 said:

This is the Light Panel I have built and set-up in my Observatory. Brilliantly simple, and with auto dimmer control:-

https://www.cloudynights.com/topic/536533-diy-alnitak-flat-panel/

Steve

 

Good idea!
I have both a small and a large panel like that and they are pretty good, the A4 panel was perfect, but the A3 panel wasn't totally even (might not matter for everyone, depends on the usage, for example mosaics require pretty much perfect flats)
I think converting one of those panels would be right up Gina's alley and give consistent results

I've tried several methods for taking flats and i found none really worked perfect and consistent all the time except using a real flat panel.

Artesky makes flat panels that aren't too expensive and they have both manual and USB controlled version. (they can also be bought through FLO, but don't seem to be stocked)
Here's the 550mm version in use (full brightness here, it's also bright enough to double as a worklight)

The Samyang 135mm is pretty much perfect wide open, but note that there's often problems with sensor tilt or sometimes lens not perfectly adjusted. 
Focus is also extremely critical, critical focus zone is just 0.01mm at f2.

Flats seems very dark.
This might not apply for KStars...some software automatically converts ADU to 16bit, so you might want to try 30k

As far as i know no.
Shere's Ascom Server for client/server functions, but that still depends on Windows 

Nice core!

M31 is so bright that's it's really just aperture and resolution that makes the core good, there isn't a need for a lot of exposure.

Here's a single 300s luminance exposure at 12,5% the original size.

As you can see here only the small part in the middle is overexposed so you can take pretty long exposures.

I imaged SN2019ein during the testing phase of the new scope and thought it was a pretty nice FOV so i ended up making an actual image of this area over the last week.

Frames:
Astrodon B 50mm: 20x300" bin 1x1
Astrodon G 50mm: 19x300" bin 1x1
Astrodon L 50mm: 44x300" bin 1x1
Astrodon R 50mm: 28x300" bin 1x1

Telescope: AG Optical Convergent FA14 14.5" f/5
Mount: 10 Micron GM2000
Camera: Motavian G3-16200
Guiding: Moravian G3 OAG and ZWO ASI174mm Mini

Lets hope you need to extend it then because i can't 3d print a working saw 😂

Great, i already got models for M68 spacers.
Do you have a small extension that can be removed if you need to shorten the distance?

Your dither is prboably way too small then. Test with a scale of 5 and see if it dithers enough for it to be easily visible.
A larger dither will not only help with removing noise, but also fix small inaccuracies in flats if dust were to move a little or focus were bad.

I would not recommend 3D printed adapters/extensions for permanent use, especially not in smaller diameters.
For spacers 3D printing is ok, but they might not be accurate enough so they can make a small tilt.
I can make you a few rings and ship them to Spain for something like 10-15€.
Which size would you need them?

1) Maybe the images i didn't receive weren't dithered? If they were dithered you should change dither scale in PHD2, i had to do that with an OAG. I choose scale 5.0 with medium dither in SGP.
I'm imaging at 1855mm with guidecam scale at 0.65"
2) It's definitely not tilt, it's in all corners. TS does unfortunately not give the exact numbers all the time, also filters can influence the distance. for 3mm thick filters 1 mm extra of extension should be added.

I can recommend you try to change the distance with 1mm increments and lastly 0.5mm for fine tuning.
To not have to pay a ton for extensions/spacers that migt be uneeded i can recommend you find someone with a 3d printer to print 1mm, 2mm spacers.

I would print them for you, but i'm in Norway so it would probably take a while for them to arrive. I'm sure you can find someone in Spain that can do it pretty cheap.
I have actually printed a 25-30mm M78 extension with threads for a Takahashi TOA150 for a friend, it worked great so he ended up using it and it's been on his scope for over 1 year 😂

There's almost no vignetting in your lights so it's definitely overcorrecting, i think you should try lower ADU to around 30k, but it's probably not the sollution to the problem.
I believe the cause is that you are taking the flats at room temperature, since they are several seconds long they have some dark noise in them at that temperature.
There's the possibility of using dark flats, but i'd simply recommend you take them att -20C as with darks and lights.

Slight overcorrection after calibration and stacking. 

I also got some comments on other stuff.
1) You should look at using dithering to remove noise better, it will remove collumn defects and hot pixels a lot better than cosmetic correction. I've never used cosmectic correction with the G3-16200.
2) Which scope do you have? Seems like you're using a flattener/focal reducer with the wrong distance to the sensor.

I cleaned a diagonal a few weeks back.
I used a blower first, then a camel hair brush gently to remove kinda loose particles and last Kleenex+ Baader Wonder Fluid (the whole surface was covered) 
Diagonals often have better coating than mirrors, but not always, you can often find what kind of coating it has been googling the name of the diagonal.

Pretty bad before cleaning...

Very good after cleaning, a few particles left that i didn't remove. Cleaning them would probably hurt more than it would help.

I could only find a single scratch and it was there before i cleaned it.

It would probably be best with subframes

Lights, flats, bias and darks

I'm using a flat panel too, an Artesky USB 550mm panel.

Would you be ok with sharing a stack of uncalibrated files? Something like 10 of each would be perfect

Make sure to dither and the hot pixels will be removed easily.
If you use darks for an uncooled camera make sure they are taken at a lower temperature than the lights, that way they will remove some of the dark noise, but probably not all.

If the darks are taken at a warmer temperature they will also remove some signal.

I have a Moravian G3-16200, i always aim for 30k ADU and get perfect flats.
How are you taking your flats? Light source?

Looks pretty good, but in my opinion you can't really judge an image or the camera it's taken with from a small image, you need full resolution

4 hours ago, Bukko said:

I don't think it matters which type of studbar you choose - stainless or plated...

There is a good cost saving going for plated, so I woud have no problem with that. The only minor issue is the plated bar will rust where it is cut. If you get two lengths and cut it down to make the 4 ties, keep the uncut end above ground and it will be fine.

This really does not need to be complicated; there are loads of good ideas on how to make it look good, but I guess it depends on how much effort you feel the need to go to...

For me, having some of the stud showing adds a certain industrial look to it and I actually think it looks good like that...

Gordon.

If you look at the link i posted you can see they apply cold galvanizing to protect the ends of the cut threaded rods

I agree with you that it looks better with some of the studs showing, i have to say regular dome nuts rarely looks good.

When we're speaking about industrial i've found industrual electrical enclosures  with DIN rails, DIN rail power supplies etc makes for a really great electrical setup, it's great to have everything bolted down and it doesn't look bad either.
I don't like at all the scopes with pc, tons of cables etc all on top of them.
 

Here's the cabinet at my co-owned remote observatory (could be tidied up a lot)