Jump to content

sgl_imaging_challenge_2021_4.gif.6a323659519d12fc7cafc409440c9dbf.gif

Delboy_Hog

Members
  • Content Count

    441
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

137 Excellent

7 Followers

About Delboy_Hog

  • Rank
    Star Forming

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    Swindon

Recent Profile Visitors

3,474 profile views
  1. Absolutely, I've had so much fun trying to image with the Skywatcher Mak 127 (which I see in your signature too!) on its alt-az mount. Granted I'll never win any awards for the resulting images, and at 1,500mm focal length you have to be prepared to ditch 95% of your 30s frames, but it's still fun - and very rewarding too! That said, I've hugely enjoyed having an HEQ5 and small refractor for those occasions where I need a slightly higher success rate!! And yes, on the dither, any direction at random is good. Although be aware that your mount might take more time to settle down when you
  2. Hey LeeHore7, that's a nice looking image you've got there! Yes, as Michael says, I think it's walking noise - on an equatorial mount that doesn't have the field rotation, it appears in straight lines (I encountered this a while back, see: I scratched my Soul (nebula) - but don't know how? - Imaging - Image Processing, Help and Techniques - Stargazers Lounge Dithering has indeed helped, and having also tried this on my Alt-Az mount where I don't guide or dither, I have tried moving the mount a tiny bit between frames. Time consuming (can take a few seconds for the mount to settle af
  3. I didn't figure it out I'm afraid @JemC, I found the "save files simultaneously to DSLR" option on the ASIair, so have gone back to using RAW files from the camera's memory card, rather than the FIT files from the ASIair, though would still like to know what's going on here! Because I have to break up and pack away my kit after every night, the approach I have now means I can stick the intervalomter in the camera and start taking darks while I strip down the rest of the kit, rather than having to keep the ASIair plugged and powered. Though having learned the hard way that you can't stack
  4. I've had a similar issue on a couple of different occasions (albeit with the older version of the ASIair. How far (if at all) did the mount move within the 60 steps? Yours sounds weird if things had all worked previously, although I've found some settings reset following an update to the app etc, so worth double-checking the settings are still the same as you remember. And just in case helpful, some things I got wrong at various points were: - Tried to calibrate guiding on Polaris - Plugged the ST4 cable into the ASIair rather than the camera - Hadn't given a big enough figur
  5. The other thing I'm learning is how different images look on different screens - it's very strange! I've just looked through the images on this thread again, and they look so different from my phone to the laptop, and different again on my work laptop...how on earth do you know what your image really looks like if it's different to everyone depending on their screen!?
  6. Holy Moly, that's a lovely version - lots of faint stuff, detail in the dust lanes, and I love the colour you've got in the stars - that's something else I need to work on - it's white blobs only for me at the moment! I really must check out this Startools! What's the secondary point spread thingy?! Thanks for that - it's comforting to know that there's good stuff in the data. Like many of us, I've got a lot of projects in mind, but I've taken a number of images where I did something wrong and something doesn't work for some reason, it can get disheartening. I'm finally getting to the
  7. Many thanks for that, that's hugely helpful to hear the similarities / differences with Pixinsight. The masking is probably next on my list to learn, I think. It's a helpful one for night-landscape shots too. And yes, I definitely agree that there's a fine line on how far to push it - and it seems very easy to go that one stretch too far! I think what I've learned most from this thread is that there are other tools that I'm not yet using that can get my data a bit further in the right direction before it starts to come apart - I just need to get some experience of using those tools.
  8. Lovely! So many good processes - I really like these - the faint stuff around the edge of the galaxy is there (that I didn't manage to bring out), but in a way that makes it distinct from the background sky. That seems to be quite an art (or science?!) - my version (albeit riddled with gradients) just seems to merge indistinctly with the background sky. That's definitely on my list of things to correct. And some people seem to be managing to bring out the dust lanes more clearly, and get some detail of a swirl in the core too - that's barely visible in my go at this - presumably that's
  9. Thanks all, I'm intrigued by the different approaches, software, brightness, contrasts etc. Makes me realise just how much I've got to learn! Will definitely try again / add more data on this (preferably moonless!), and as discussed in other threads recently, I definitely still need to master flat frames! The 6d is a great camera, but certainly comes with some challenges! Hoping to get to some darker skies once we're out of lockdown too!
  10. Thanks David, yes I suspected it wasn't the darks - and as you say, I rarely use darks with the 6d unless my exposures are 10+mins - a good dither between frames more or less does the trick there, especially in this cold weather! I would agree with you that the flip shouldn't affect the flats - it hasn't for me in the past. But this time there are artefacts that seem to be generated through the flat frames (i.e. they're not there when I just stack the lights) that are being repeated across the frame (e.g. see the light and dark smudges in the top right and bottom left of the full frame).
  11. Hmmm, no, I'm having no luck with this.... The artefacts seem to be coming from the flats, and the issue is being compounded by the flip, duplicating some of the artifacts. I take two sets of flats at different exposures in case one of them doesn't work...and this time neither does, regardless of whether I apply them to the pre or post-meridian flip light frames, or the whole stack. I just don't understand how these flats can seemingly generate distinct artifacts? It's a shame because I think there's some reasonable data here, and about 3 hours of it. Unfortunately one of the peri
  12. I'm really struggling here, and hoping you can help! In the past I've not had any trouble with DSS coping with the meridian flip and calibration frames, but something's gone very wrong this time, and you'll see from the image I've got weird artifacts appearing all over the image (I've circled a few of the weirder ones). On this occasion, I took about 40 light frames (M81 / M82 with ED80 and Canon 6d), then as the forecasted cloud rolled in for an hour or so, I took my flats and a few darks, then as the cloud had cleared, did the Meridian flip and took another 40 or so light frames, then
  13. Hi Laurieast, thanks for that - I definitely need to look up Gradient Exterminator! And I haven't used (or even seen!) that feature in photoshop, so I'll be googling that one too, thank you!
  14. Thanks Almcl, it is different isn't it? It stands out much brighter than the background sky on this version - it has a punch to it! I'd be curious to know how you brightened the galaxy specifically and not the background, is that something you've done through curves etc, or is it layer masks and things - not sure if StarTools has those specifically? It's a trick I need to learn for the fainter objects in the night sky, I think. Thanks for taking the time to use the data - it fascinates me how everybody has slightly different approaches and different outcomes!
×
×
  • 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.