Jump to content

Banner.jpg.b83b14cd4142fe10848741bb2a14c66b.jpg

ollypenrice

Members
  • Posts

    38,132
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    304

Posts posted by ollypenrice

  1. Super resolution in the galaxies but is the black point slightly clipped? It's very flat and black. I wonder if you could trade a bit of noise for a bit more faint stuff?

    Olly

    • Like 1
    • Thanks 1
  2. I'd put it on a Skywatcher AZ EQ6. AZ (Alt Az) is much nicer for visual because eyepiece position and orientation are more consistent and this is OK for planetary imaging, too.  It's quick to set up, with no polar alignment. But... when you want EQ orientation, you have it. Finally, you will not be under-mounted, which is just so nice.

    For Ha viewing I would just buy a dedicated Ha scope at whatever budget suits your pocket.

    Olly

  3. For focus,  your capture software should give you a Full Width Half Max reading on either a chosen star or an average across the chip.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Full_width_at_half_maximum

    This means that it looks at the bell curve of brightness going from one side of the star, through the middle, to the other side and it measures the stellar width half way up the curve. It can't accurately measure from one side of the full stellar image to the other because the faintness of the edge of the star makes it impossible to be sure just where it starts and ends. If using this FWHM facility in your software, the star must not be saturated. If it is, the top will be chopped off top of the curve and this will then have a flat top. To avoid saturated stars you can choose fainter ones or shorten the exposures, but 3 second-plus exposures average out the seeing and give you more stable FWHM readings. Do expect them to vary, though, at each reading and keep the lowest reading in mind.

    In practice, I would use the B-Mask in live view on your bright alignment star, frame up the image and then check FWHM just before starting the run. The thing about FWHM is that you'll find a focus star without having to leave the target whereas, with a B mask, there might not be a suitable one in the frame. So... initial bright star focus with B mask and then FWHM on the target region after that. Check focus regularly - as ever.

    Olly

     

    • Like 1
    • Thanks 1
  4. 10 hours ago, Gerr said:

    Hi Olly,

    I see your point and it is easy to overdo the saturation in processing without too much effort!!  I had another go at this and maybe this image shows where you are coming from better but to my eyes it is a fine line indeed to tread.

    The M101 core re-done (better hopefully)??

    Geraint.

    M101PinwheelGalaxy2024edit3.thumb.jpg.963e8da4063929c013e4ebd28f488622.jpg

     

    For me, way better. We can now trace spiral detail much further into the core.

    Olly

    • Like 1
  5. 13 minutes ago, Gerr said:

    Hi Olly,

    Core isn’t saturated in the linear data. I guess I like the centres bright as long as I don’t obscure the dust lanes. A number of processing connotations can be followed dependent on your ‘artistic’ side. It’s what makes astro processing so difficult as there is no hard and fast rule to follow - whatever looks good I suppose!! 😂

    Thanks,

    Geraint.

    I'm not sure I agree. Not destroying information in processing is as much scientific as artistic and going from unsaturated to saturated does destroy information.

    Olly

  6. An attractive nebula, nicely done.

    Things I might look at would be 1) noise - StarXterminator is so effective. 2) Colour noise in the background sky. It's quite 'colour busy' and just selecting the background and reducing saturation might make a difference.

    Olly

    • Like 1
  7. I'm not a fan of mini-computers on the scope. I host six remote instruments and have replaced a lot of them for their owners. For long term reliability I like an observatory desktop with a lot of USB ports and I gather the cables at the dovetail and at the top of the counterweight bar and let them hang from there. Clearly this isn't a portable solution.

    Olly

    • Like 3
  8. 1 hour ago, Rodd said:

    Thanks Olly. You hit upon a couple of the plethora of problems with this image-hence my frustrated post. Here is the final version of this image. better?
    281F82B2-00C7-4963-8F3E-4A7F65B7FF9F.thumb.jpeg.18a3ba12a20df831ddf0d2953f15c171.jpeg

    Yes, lovely. I'm going to see if I can find my old linear TEC140 data and see what difference modern processing tools make. 

    Olly

  9. It's very good and the colour is far more accurate than the bright blue spirals which we often see with M101.

    The core is saturated in the first one and still saturated, though less so, in the second. The first thing I'd want to do is look at the core in the linear data. Is that saturated?  If it isn't, there is no need for it to become saturated during the stretch. You just need a better stretch, or a blending of two stretches. Maybe just a hand-shaped stretch in Curves would do it. What does the linear core look like?

    Olly

    • Thanks 1
  10. For me, this image didn't seem exceptional until I clicked for the largest size - and then I found that the central bulge and dust lane were absolutely stunning. Unfortunately the last one seems to have been posted at lower resolution, or am I giving it the wrong clicks? It needs to be seen in large format to show its class.

    What I do think is that the fainter outer regions are noisy, with a pronounced grain. I'm sure Russ Croman's Noise Xterminator would fix that easily and might allow you to give the lower brightnesses a bit more of a stretch. I wouldn't apply it to the brighter parts or dust lane. Those are superb.

    Olly

  11. 5 hours ago, Budgie1 said:

    Good question, I assumed it was Oiii in there as I imaged the nebula back in 2022 with the Askar Duo-band filter (7nm) & ASI294MC Pro camera and got a more pronounced central area.

    I've also included the Oiii stack from this session, stretched and nothing else done to it.

    NGC2264-ConeNebula-4h52m-NB-05032022-1.png.69ca01b0a0ae5b129c5e0ebd3342fca9.png

    Oiii_Stretch_Only.thumb.png.89d203bc9406d7d1dd3ce5a66c0d1d57.png

     

    Interesting. This is the blue channel from our OSC camera.

    ConeOSCBLUE.jpg.a9b2bbbb4b28e95a44ba6fa5f756b658.jpg

    I'd probably vote for reflection, but who knows?

    Olly

    • Like 1
  12. 4 hours ago, TiffsAndAstro said:

    Apologies for the title but it's hard to describe what I'm trying to search for.

     

    With limited visibility in backyard  say roughly west I can see Orion as it drops, followed by other stars at same distance from ncp

    Is there a way to sort of take mosaics as they pass by and then stitch them together?

    Cos it might look cool

    The answer is 'yes.' This is a mosaic combining 42 individual images.

    ORION%20MONOCEROS5full%20web-364x450.jpg

    I can't tell you how to do it in five minutes, though!

    :grin:lly

    • Like 1
×
×
  • 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.