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.



Advanced Members
  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

291 Excellent

About AstroAndy

  • Rank
    Proto Star

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location
    Surrey, UK
  1. This looks like it should be on the cover of an astronomy book. , good one, Richard.
  2. Dab nab it! And here I thought I saw the peacock first.
  3. If my first attempts at this target had been like this, I'd probably be on my way to greatness right now.
  4. It looks like a painting came to mind as soon as I saw it, before I saw Reggie's comment, awesome job, Adam.
  5. Pretty good to get something like that from a light polluted zone, Carole.
  6. Hi all I reprocessed this LHaRGB image of M81 (3h25m Lum, 10, 5, 3, 1min subs), about 1hr each of RGB and ha, so about 7h25m altogether). Still not totally happy with it, but it's as good as it'll ever be. - Andy - LHaRGB bp copy.tif
  7. On the plus side, it's all there.
  8. NP, this is an extraordinarily good image in my eyes.
  9. Hi Mike This is an awesome image, rich in detail. Blackpoint is a little clipped, as bright as Holmberg IX (the little irregular galaxy to "the left" of M81, what might be thought of as gradient might be the beginnings of the IFN). Normally, the lum. layer should lead the RGB one (details come from lum. color from RGB), unless you layer it in at a lower percentage, but then you'd lose details. I need to get me one of those Atik 460exes. Clear skies - Andy -
  10. Hello All I have noticed that sometimes stars that should be orange (or slightly blue) turn out geen in my images. I don't think this is due to misalignment in my (L)RGB images, but rather to the different sizes of the star due to differences in how much light the filters capture for any given time. Simply put, stars in, say a green sub of 5m, are bigger than stars in a red one, thus, even with good alignment, green surrounds the red. Is there a way to correct this using Photoshop, and what is it? - Andy -
  11. I'm with Carole on this one, the second, softer iteration is nicely toned down, but I must say, I do like the harder version, too, it jumps out at you.
  12. Ty Mick, I probably should have introduced at tad more, but then, I didn't want to overdo it.
  13. What Olly said, I just tried that, and it worked, as they say here, a treat, thanks Olly.
  14. Hi Sam, if an image is well calibrated, just to see what you have (noise, actual features), this can be checked on by the "Equalize command under Image > Adjustments. But, as it isn't really part of (at least my) processing workflow, after checking, one should go back one step (in PS). A quick way to deal with stars would be http://www.astropix.com/html/j_digit/starcolr.html On your image, it looks good as it is, I don't think a synthetic flat would be needed anymore. Awesome the details you could pull out of a Bortle 8 zone. - Andy -
  15. Thanks, still not optimal (what with orientation and such), but I've been after the RGB for awhile now (including 2-3 trips to my dark site, supposedly clear, but of course not , and one where it was clear but windy).
  • Create New...

Important Information

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