CraigT82

Really nice Kon loving the surface details on view 

Really nice work Geof loads of surface detail on show 

Nice one 👍🏼 Can’t beat it for a £60 scope! 

41 minutes ago, geoflewis said:

Lovely rework Craig

Thanks Geof, just concentrated on adjusting the colour and tidying the edges really. Had a another go at cloning away the edge rind which has worked a bit better than my first go. 

Bit of a reprocess… quite subtle not much difference really.

original for ref…

Very nice Geof 👍🏼

About 6 years ago I bought a big down filled parka coat from millets which was about £100 I think, best Astro investment I ever made. Also have some Karimoor snow fur insulated boots which have been great but are a bit worn out now.  For me it’s mostly the hands and feet that suffer. Haven’t yet found any gloves that keep my fingers warm whilst letting me operate everything without taking them off. The search continues.

Sounds interesting. AI deconvolution trained on Astro images that uses that can calculate PSF from the stars in the image. Also can apply different deconvolution to different parts of the image (stars/nebula etc). 

24 minutes ago, happy-kat said:

can you have spherical aberration on a parabolic mirror?

Absolutely, if the parabola isn’t actually a parabola due to poor figuring 

3 hours ago, vlaiv said:

Was thinking about this just this morning.

My wife casually mentioned that she read online that boiling water more than once is harmful. My jaw dropped, so I went online and - sure enough, there are such claims scattered around the web.

Ok, so it is a known thing that people tend to write utter nonsense just so they can publish something and earn some money of people reading that (or watching you tube videos and so on). This is unfortunately not limited to odd individual here and there - it has become mainstream in journalism - write sensational things, and don't care about accuracy, truth or if you are in fact writing utter nonsense, so we can't expect general public to behave any better then professionals.

Problem is however much deeper if we start including AI in the equation. Most AI / Chat bots nowadays use hive mind approach to knowledge. What is stated on majority of sources online - must be truth / fact. On the other hand - we have copy / paste journalism and just passing on the "news" / articles without any sort of background check, so some things become "common knowledge" - even if they are completely wrong.

This problem is going to just grow larger if "trusted" sources like AI / Google / Chat bots start serving the same content as being "valid.

 

To be honest Vlaiv I'm not totally convinced you're not an A.I.

😆

Very nice image Geof. The never ending battle of detail vs noise continues

22 hours ago, JeremyS said:

Cracking job Craig 👍🏻

Thanks Jeremy

6 hours ago, Neil_104 said:

Here's one of my pics from the occultation on Thursday, this is the re-appearance. It's not the sharpest as by this stage the Moon & Mars were directly above a house and so affected by rising heat.

This was taken with a C6 and ZWO ASI 533MC-Pro at f/20.

I had planned on keeping things simple and just imaging the disappearance at f/10 and then viewing the re-appearance through the eyepiece, but I made the mistake of changing the plan at the last minute.... when taking my initial shots at f/10 as the Moon approached Mars, I decided I'd like to get a bit closer in on the action. So I grabbed a barlow and then fumbled about with cold fingers and a sleepy head to try to get it all connected (I suddenly needed to dig out an old 1.25" visual back instead of the 2" I was using initially). When I finally got it all set up, I looked at the laptop screen and Mars was...GONE! D'oh! 😫

So lesson learned - more planning and fewer impulsive decisions for the next event of this kind!

Anyways, I now had just under an hour to make sure I was pointing at the correct part of the Moon for the re-appearance. I made the decision not to change a thing, just WAIT 🙂

It's a shame I lost out on the steadier skies for the disappearance, but I'm still really pleased this. It made the 4:15am get up and -3C temps worth it for sure.

Very nice, was a great event 

22 hours ago, knobby said:

Really nice 👍🏻

Thanks Knobby.

21 hours ago, Space Cowboy said:

Poor seeing or not you've got some nice definition there Craig.

Thanks yeah came out ok which I was very surprised at after nearly giving up after one capture.

21 hours ago, Kon said:

Great image and nice details.

Thanks Kon

7 hours ago, si@nite said:

A very nice image Craig some great detail there well done!

Thanks Si

7 hours ago, geoflewis said:

That's really good Craig. I also like the colour, which is very similar to what I see folks like Damian Peach, Martin Lewis and others posting. I think I've messed up the histogram sliders with new my colour camera, as my images are comong out a bit too red/pink. I've had a discussion with Martin Lewis about it and done a bit of background reading, so now I think I was wrong to try to set the balance on Mars and probably should have left the sliders alone. Hey ho.....

Thanks Geof. I don’t usually adjust the colour at all at capture I do it all in post. Must admit I spent quite a bit of time fiddling with the Hue and saturation.

• KIT: SW 300p on AZ-EQ6 (in AltAz mode). ASI485mc.   ZWO ADC.    Baader Q barlow 2.25x (working at 3.4x).    Astronomik L2 filter
• CAPTURE & PROCESS: 10x60sec captures in FC.   Best 5% stacked in AS3.   Image derotation.   Sharpening in Astrosurface. Finishing in Gimp.
• DETAILS: Image scale 0.12"pp/5200mmF/17.   Planet at 59 deg.   Derotated to 22:018 UTC.  Seeing seemed poor during capture, fuzzy disc difficult to focus. Transparency 10/10. Captured from Taunton, UK

Thanks for looking & Clear Skies!

Yeah you might need a lot of extension to get up to f18, depends on the focal length of the barlow. 
 

You can calculate the required extension using this formula:

Power=(BarlowFL+distance)/BarlowFL

If the barlow focal length isn’t published you can get it by measuring the distance between the last cell and the top of the barlow, that will be the ‘distance’, you know the power is 2x so you can rearrange and get the barlow focal length. 

2 minutes ago, Rustang said:

I looked at getting a 3x barlow to bring it up to f15 but when I put my set up details into astronomy tools sample calculator it was even more damaging to the sample rate so I cant really up the focal length

Ignore that calculator it’s not meant for planetary imaging.

With the 224 you want to be up around f18 ish really. 

Post deleted - miss read the question 🙄

The sticky backed magnetic stuff could be a goer too as the pillar is steel.

For me it’s sticky backed Velcro. Decent 3M stuff as the cheaper stuff never sticks for long. 

https://www.screwfix.com/p/velcro-brand-black-heavy-duty-stick-on-tape-1m-x-50mm/21670?tc=GT3&ds_kid=92700048793315993&ds_rl=1249416&gclid=Cj0KCQiAg_KbBhDLARIsANx7wAxDKb94WTackzA3PhxxjEqKrM7IuheXtdsOTVGw0RNG_sl1LnTFYogaAjSZEALw_wcB&gclsrc=aw.ds

48 minutes ago, tomato said:

I agree that you shouldn’t be too concerned. I had to get permission from the builder (new estate) to put mine up as there was a clause in the covenants about outbuildings but have never had any comment from the neighbours. With it being green my main concern was that somebody would chuck a load of empty bottles in there if I left the shutter open during the day.☺️
 

Tidy 👍🏼

22 minutes ago, Rustang said:

Is the restacking with different alignment points for the Mars issue?

Yes, sorry should have said 

I’d probably try restacking with different alignment points. Also tick RGB align box in AS3 that might help 

Put the dome straight on the ground first and leave it there for a few weeks, let the neighbours complain if they want to. If anyone measures it it’s less than 2.5m high and no one can do anything about that, then after it’s all died down surreptitiously move it onto the slab! 

The colouring is correct as far as the capture goes, but because you’re using an achromat the CA is throwing the colour balance off.