tooth_dr

Thanks to everyone who contributed to the thread. @Cosmic Geoff @Davey-T @baggywrinkle @Louis D 👍🏼

13 minutes ago, Cosmic Geoff said:

The wedge seems to be getting the thumbs-down here. As an engineer, I can appreciate that using a wedge could add more stress to a consumer-grade mount.  Perhaps the best answer is to mount it as an alt-az but design the setup/pier so that a wedge can be added later if desired.

The wedge for the OU LX200 telescope is a fixed one, apparently welded up from angle iron.

I will hopefully have access to this scope so I guess there is the potential for doing some nice deep sky imaging myself! I think having the option to use it or not is sensible. 

8 minutes ago, Adreneline said:

Came down at 4.15 a.m. to put the scope away after imaging the Cygnus region and spotted Orion lingering over the house tops next to the moon. I couldn't resist giving it a quick go so this is 12 x 30s of Ha, OIII and SII and 12 x 60s of Ha, calibrated and stacked in APP, processed in PI and combined in PixelMath and colour tweaked in PS.

Taken with a Samyang 135mm with ASI1600MM-Pro, unguided on a iOptron CEM25-EC.

Thanks for looking.

Adrian

 

I’m blown away by how good this for so little data.  Great processing and worthwhile shooting at 4am 👍🏼👍🏼

Lovely mono image, it has real depth to it. Hopefully you’ll get your issues ironed out. 

2 hours ago, Adam J said:

what scope is this?

Hi Adam

Taken using the trusty SW ED80 Pro

Stunning!  Love the dark dusty bits around the periphery, you have created some lovely contrasts.

@Davey-T thanks the the reply. Although I’ve used much smaller alt as mounts, this looks like a different league in terms of size!

1 minute ago, Cosmic Geoff said:

I was thinking of the deepsky imaging with long exposures option.  IIRC the eyepiece height of the OU instrument is suited to standing observers - a bit high for a child.  The wedge is triangular (a fixed welded sub-frame) and I don't think removing it would make the instrument significantly lower.

Thanks Geoff.  I doubt it will ever be used for deep sky stuff, but you know what, it's better to have it for sure!

Great job Neil, the cooled DSLR is performing well.

2 minutes ago, Cosmic Geoff said:

Future proofing.

I have seen the 16" LX200 Meade at the Open University observatory, and that sits on a wedge.

Thanks Geoff.  In term of future proofing - is this solely for deepsky imaging with long exposures?  I'm just trying to rationalise the spending versus what benefits it brings.  It would raise the overall height of the scope for viewing too - not sure if this is an advantage or disadvantage?

20 hours ago, Astrosharkey said:

Adam,

 

looks great

 

Simon

Cheers Simon.  I got some Oiii and Sii last night on this with the moon a bit smaller, and will get some more Ha tonight.  I want to 'finish' this one before I move one.

I need some advice regarding a 14" scope.  If this is going to be used for public use, in an observatory, mostly just with a camera to give live images on a screen, do you need a wedge?  It wont be used for long exposure imaging.  Is there any advantages to fitting a wedge?

Thanks in advance.

Hi David, thats a really nice view of it, I like the framing a lot.  Pretty impressive for 1.5 hours!  I think I would prefer a little more grain in the image.

Extremely poor conditions last night, constant haze and large moon.  I just left it running because I knew it wasnt going to rain, so had nothing to lose.

Here it is!  Lacks contrast etc, but tracking looks ok, so I'm happy with that aspect.

600s Ha x 63 subs.

Thanks for looking

Adam

Nice Job Goran, the Ha is pretty much essential I would say on this one.  I've about 14 hours of Ha on this, and it's pretty faint indeed.  I havent tried anything like this before as I tend to do the more common stuff.  I might post it up later.

12 minutes ago, alan potts said:

Not sure what it should look like but it was a whole lot worse than that beforehand, I did it very quickly and with this game whats right anyway. I thought it was much more red in real terms, I know a got a few subs with the Canon a while back.

Alan

Alan, what I mean I cannot see any difference between the first one and the modified one you have posted later in the thread?

@alan potts have you attached the right image?

22 minutes ago, AbsolutelyN said:

Updated processing 

I'm loving that!  The bright highlights in and below the trunk are awesome.

25 minutes ago, Rodd said:

That's a great 1st SHO image.  Did you add Ha as a luminance?  That can really look nice--tends to bring out the details and resduce the nose.  .  Add in non linear state--just like adding a Lum lum.  Balance the histograms first.

Rodd

Thanks Rodd, Ha was luminance, as well as the green channel.  I'll post the other colour channels later for a laugh.  I did a tonemapping processing where I removed the stars (badly) and then stetched the data a lot.

6 minutes ago, Adam J said:

Nice detail what scope / camera did you use?

Cheers Adam.  This was taken with a dual setup on an EQ6, as follows

Scope 1) ED80, ATIK383L+, Baader Ha + Oiii

Scope 2) ED80, QHY9M, Optolong Ha + Sii

That’s a nice start on m33.

I’ve combined osc with mono data, as have a few chaps on here. It’s works well, and I didn’t experience any trouble doing it. I just used Astro Pixel Processor to do the stacking and aligning. I then processed in PS.

2 minutes ago, newbie alert said:

Superb Adam..

And the reason you wasn't going to post was??

Superb..

Thanks 👍🏻 I kinda thought it was a bit rubbish, with a funky purple centre 😮 but I am my own worst critic at times. 

2 hours ago, apophisOAS said:

Generally unless you are shooting towards the moon NB should cope alright with it,

Roger

I meant with the sub lengths.  What’s the consensus on that in terms of weighting them? In an ideal world I wouldn’t be imaging in Oiii or Sii at all during a big moon

Excellent Carole. Lovely image. 

1 hour ago, apophisOAS said:

Wonderful widefield image, well processed, do you ever vary sub lengths for different NB filters?

Roger

Thanks Roger. This is my first use of oiii and Sii in an image along with Ha so I just stuck with 10 minutes. I think I would change / go longer if the moon wasn’t out.   What’s the general consensus?