Jump to content


Droogie 2001

  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Droogie 2001

  1. No problem. I have been and done that before. I find I start to lose focus if I keep working on an image for too long.
  2. Personally I prefer the previous image as it just seems more natural to me. Just my preference, both are still excellent images.
  3. I really like both of them but the re-worked one looks better, the stars are more nature looking.
  4. They are 5mm and 10mm M48 spacers so 15mm not 17mm. Will still leave you off by 2.72mm. I mentioned Star Light Express as you noted it in your original post, the filter wheel being part of the imaging train. Sorry can't help anymore.
  5. So you are over by 12.28mm already and you need to reduce this as opposed to my issue where I needed to extend the distance? Can Starlight Express offer any help? It doesn't seem right that you need to remove distance. That send it took me a fair while to get my head around this too. The only comfort I can bring is once its sorted you can just move on.
  6. Not sure why your M48 / T2 would slip inside the focuser? I purhased an Altair Astro M48 17-29mm Variable Spacer Set (3 part) which attach nicely to the M48 on the OTA. https://www.altairastro.com/m48-17-29mm-variable-spacer-set-3-part.html I then used the 5mm and 10 mm only to get the back focus I requried. All I would add is that I have an OAG so you may need to select the correct rings for your setup. I now only need to extend my focuser 3mm to gain focus.
  7. Very nice. Maybe I should dust off my 8SE? Looks like you have managed to really work that tube
  8. Good luck with the new camera. Just read through the spec differences between my Mark 1 and 2. Aside from shorter download times (will save me 6 secs an image...) and adjustable adapters there does not seem to be a huge difference. I do like the new look of the Mark 2 though. If they are priced the same as the Marks 1 then all good. Unfortunatley I cannot justify trading in my Mark 1 for a Mark 2. It's interesting to see Moravian aren't rushing out the latest and greatest CMOS chip but instead evolving their exisiting cameras.
  9. Certainly having the same spec camera will probably make things easier. Could you go for another mono and use the RGB filters across to the new one? I realise this increases costs but my concern would be the OSC data. I guess it will work but not sure if the results will be as pleasing as combining seperate RGB data with LUM. Have to confess I have no experience of Dual Rigs, managing just one OTA and camera is a challenge enough. I know there are alot of forum members who do run them so hopefully they can jump in with some suggestions.
  10. I know the program Registar (not Registax) can deal with combining images from different focal lengths and image scales, so maybe worth a look. Doing the combining in PS or DSS will either be very difficult or simply not possible. It only does this and does NOT offer any post processing options, it does however do this job very well. Its not free though there is a free trial, I think I paid around a £130?. If it helps you acheive what you are looking for then maybe worth a look. You can download the free trial which stops you from saving an image but at least you maybe able to carry out some tests with similar data that you can find freely available on the Internet. This will help you before you even start spending any money to see if it is a viable option. https://aurigaimaging.com/
  11. I like it. Good round stars which is not easy with the long FL.
  12. Mono cameras are better placed for imaging the moon. But as Demonperformer mention if you are interested in Planets then a colour one is easier as a mono one will need filters and a filter wheel. The results from a mono camera and filters on the planets will offer better results when processed correctly. I have an ASI120MC (colour) which I have used for both the Planets and the Moon. If had the funds I would purhase a mono version for the Moon only, gives a better contrast. Whereas the Bayer matrix on the colour one can cause some post processing challenges, though these are fairly easy to address.
  13. Both are excellent but I preferred the second image, the two blended is also stunning. Due to limited imaging time for Orion I decided to go with the Horsehead this year but your Orion Nebula with the same OTA has convinced me to try this later in the year. Sadly my DSO imaging is over until later this year. Orion is now blocked by my neighbours house and the OTA is not really suited to Galaxies.
  14. Like you I have to setup and tear down each time. This has given me thought about trying to maximise my imaging time by leaving my equipment out. Above all rain is my biggest concern. I once setup whilst there a bit of low cloud around but multiple forecasts was for it to clear up within the next hour or so with no chance of rain. When I just finished setting up the heavens open with torrential rain for 20mins . I grabbed some black liners to cover my kit (CCD, Mount, OTA) as this is all that I could do at the time. Luckily everything remained dry so I got away with it. It did however make me much more cautious about setting up with cloud around. So leaving the equipment up all night even with some sort of notification system is not something I am planning to do. Maybe one day if I get an Observatory, even then I have heard some horror stories with rain and automated roofs not shutting...
  15. I have been waiting for this for a while now. Apparently all of the data was taken a while ago but they had to wait on data taken from the Artic. I believe it will also include the accretion disk around the black hole, should be interesting.
  16. Interesting post. I did not realise there was an Image container process. I tried this method process (below) with one image and was successful but as the original poster mentioned it was only suitable for a single image, will have a look into that further. That said I currently use a defect map when I am running Cosmetic Correction which seems to acheive good results, have you tried this method?
  17. Very much enjoyed the launch. Seeing the two boosters land together was an amazing sight, I couldn’t see any CGI! I guess ask the thousands of spectators who saw the landing, perhaps they were all in on the conspiracy?! Not sure why some people have a lot of negative views of Elon Musk? As other people have mentioned he could have just used a concrete block or iron so why not use his own car? The point of it is to test simply test the pay load capabilities. This guy is revolutionising space transport. Yes, he is a business man but at least he has a bold vision for humanity. (Tesla, Hyper-Loop, Mars / Moon landings) Comparing this to NASA’s long overdue SLS rocket system makes all the issues with Governments and politics all too obvious. A bloated $1 billion rocket which gets thrown away after every use or have x2 $90 million-dollar Falcon Heavy launches to help match the payload capacity. Anyway, end of rant I guess you can never please everyone…
  18. Depends on you imaging / chip size. Did you take flats?
  19. I was going to mention this until I read your post Sara. I also have 3nm Chroma's and have been very pleased with them so far.
  20. Interesting outcome. I rarely use ABE as I find it creates too much of a dramatic change in brightness within the image (this is when using a CCD without Darks). I know some people swear by it but I am increasingly avoiding the process. I always use DBE as this gives me more control. Not suggesting the outcome would be any different but maybe worth a quick test to see if you get similar results. Your example with ABE & Darks appears to be dramactically different. If no darks help you then thats a bonus I'd say.
  21. I see no need to waste precious imaging time on taking Darks in an imaging evening. These can be taken entirely seperately, yes there maybe a temperature difference between what happens from one evening to another but overall these are not likely to make any difference. I know I would rather spend more time on light frames than darks. Newbie Alert: I believe this is what you are stating? Flat frames are important, probably being the highest priority as these will make a significant difference with vignetting etc. Again no need to waste time taking BIAS in an imaging evening. You can get away with not using Darks on a CCD (I dont use darks) but the noise from the warm DSLR sensors will probably add noise if not taken. Worth experimenting with and without them.
  • 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.