Jump to content





  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by happy-kat

  1. In addition to the above I would: experiment with stopping the lens down maybe try one stop to start to help minimise the chromatic aberration and also help with corner star shape I used too small an ROI in autodev and probably over shrunk the stars, could do with a fresh go to re do the CA reduction the mask was not quite big enough on some stars. startools 1.7.461MR6 | HLVG plugin in paintshopPro | irfanview for tiff to jpg for upload
  2. Sorry I had meant only using astrometry like you have, I was struggling to see the target but that's more my familiarity with the image and my surprise with the differences. The two DSS settings to check particularly would be that the cosmetic tab doesn't have remove hot pixels and that is in stacking settings and for DSS the setting for not white balancing is approximately set.
  3. Gosh they are quite different processes. Have you plate solved your image. Startools there's a preferred settings and output from DSS for optimum processing which uses a FITS file https://www.startools.org/links--tutorials/starting-with-a-good-dataset/deep-sky-stacker-settings
  4. Well done to the winners and all for sharing their processes, another great challenge.
  5. The data collected is different, one is nb the other broadband I assumed you wouldn't be mixing them on stacking
  6. The reference frame doesn't have to be ticked which is handy
  7. Unless stuck on decking the one thing a dob mounted telescope doesn't do is wobble
  8. Nice review https://neilenglish.net/a-newtonian-travel-scope/ Last thought, as it's truss sided the top can be dropped down should you decide to try a camera on it.
  9. If you are using the heritage 130p from a dark location you don't really need a light shroud as there's little to no light scatter to block. The focuser can have PTFE tape wrapped around can help if needed though I've not applied any to mine. The heritage 130p telescope does have a standard dove bar so has the ability to be fitted to a tripod at a later date. With a 6mm eyepiece (can't recall if I used a 1.6x barlow as well) I saw a Jupiter moon shadow and could make out 5 band areas. With the supplied 10mm saw Saturn had a ring separated from the planet. Found the ring nebula and marveled at what the grey fuzzy was.
  10. On the startools site there is a tutorial for the optimum DSS settings to use for StarTools. https://www.startools.org/links--tutorials/starting-with-a-good-dataset/deep-sky-stacker-settings
  11. Maybe the answer to this turned up yesterday on a 130p-ds imaging post, and that was effectively a thin aperture mask that was used in the primary mirror to effectively cover the mirror clips. It reduces the defraction spikes to just 4 pretty much. Took ages to find this thread to share but can't now find the other thread with the details that were posted.
  12. Also the settings on the cosmetic tab when used can cause the centre of stars to be removed
  13. The disadvantages of leaving NR on is the extra time it takes plus the NR algorithm may eat the fainter stars in the exposure taken as they are assumed to be noise. You could try different settings to see how it works on your camera.
  14. Interval use the time of the interval and exposure, so needs to be 23 seconds.
  15. I if the above doesn't help, are you setting the intravalometer up right, what are the numbers you are using?
  16. The planets are low in the sky so are going through more atmosphere which degrades the image seen. I think I'd try your 16mm with the x2 barlow as the maximum magnification as any more probably just makes a bigger blurrier blob. If it's going well with that try the x3 barlow with the 16mm. The Moon generally can take more magnification though you'll find some sessions will be better than others.
  17. I'd say that was a win, super first image. You could do dark flats as well these I find help with noise.
  18. I'll listen to that once on bbc sounds, thanks for the pointer
  19. Could try a search evoff v2 if you want to avoid shipping
  20. Is the picture the position you start from with the wedge and mount?
  21. Also when in EQ mode the mount is not mounted the same way as before
  22. I think the bolt colliding issue has been commented on before and how to resolve it
  23. This is the FOV with the kit lens at 55mm, I'd go for it have a go, try 7 seconds as a start see if the trails are ok.
  24. Plenty possible with a static mount and camera lens, this was 24mm lens. For the details they are on this post https://stargazerslounge.com/topic/340692-summer-triangle-lite The weird edges on your image that you cropped was likely due to field rotation.
  25. It's pleasing to see the process above matches the fov calculator, even if rotation is different
  • 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.