tomato

A really spectacular Elephant’s trunk Nebula, such rich colour and great detail. Have any of the RC suite of processing tools been used in the workflow?

I found it enjoyable and quite in depth for a Channel 5 offering. Makes a change from the Motorway Cops Police shoplifting Interceptors Murder Mysteries fare they usually dish up.

A recent image taken with my SY135/RC571c had some terrible star shapes caused principally by camera sag with the weight hanging off the lightweight SY Sony plastic adapter. I did make a makeshift support but it wasn’t suited to fine adjustments of the support needed to minimise tilt: So an hour or two in the workshop has produced a 360 ring with 3 support bolts at 120 degrees. This is mounted onto a longer dovetail with thicker rod, with the added bonus that the whole lens/camera assembly can now be removed from the mount without taking the saddle off. Sure, a full collar would be more stable but adjustments would be a lot harder and this rig comes on and off the mount quite frequently. Just need some clear sky time to see if I can dial out the poor star shapes…

I would recommend a tent and a sleeping bag, a worthwhile investment if you are going to attend star parties on a regular basis.

Thanks, I did say the star shapes in the raw data on the LHS were horrendous, but the subject of the image was much better quality so I decided to proceed even though this meant hitting the stars with both processing barrels so to speak. Their authenticity suffered as a result but I’m still glad that I didn’t consign the data to the bin.

In preparing a proposed email to RC Astro I have gone back and reproduced the star correction workflow which created the PN artefact from Epsilon Cygni. It turns out that BXT played no part in creating the artefact. All extremes of settings in BXT failed to produce the effect, the problem arose when I took it into StarTools after BXT and created an auto star mask. The default settings masked the spikes on Epsilon Cygni, but left some of the star untouched: When applying the star repair tool, redistribute, core is average location, with all other settings on default, the PN is created: Manually filling the mask eliminates the problem. So my lesson learnt is don't assume the auto default settings will always have the desired effect, and apologies to Russell Croman, for putting BXT under suspicion.

Thanks for the suggestion, I never thought guys like RC would have time to answer individual queries, but I will email him and let folks know on this thread what happens.

Agreed, no native ASI or ASCOM driver showing on the drop down list which the 120 needs to work with PHD. These can be downloaded and installed from the ZWO website.

Thanks, another couple of sessions are needed I think, but I’m about to pull the SY135 rig to upgrade the camera support arrangement.

And on the same mount a wider FOV taken with the SY135/RC571c/NBZ combination, 50 x 3 mins. Same processing script as the RASA8 image but with more star reduction to hopefully highlight the faint surrounding nebulosity.

Here is most of the Veil Nebula, squeezed into the FOV of the RASA8/QHY268c/NBZ combination, 51 x 3 mins. Calibrated and stacked in APP, processed in PI, StarTools (for star shapes improvement) and Affinity Photo.

Absolutely, that was the reason for starting this thread in the first place.

I keep looking at 3D printers, but with molten plastic vs machined alloy the latter always wins in my head. It must be great though, seeing something being printed on the bed when it all works, a bit like AP.

Will do, it will be a lathe and milling machine job rather than a 3D printer, still Old School on some things.😉

No, this is the Samyang 135 lens, I think the issue is due to camera sag, my agricultural camera support being the culprit. I feel another little engineering project coming on…☺️

I used BlurXterminator, the AI based tool first, principally to sharpen the nebula, on the default settings. The stars on the left hand side had pronounced wings which BXT dutifully rounded and tightened them so each star took the appearance of a triple star, rather like a Micky Mouse hat. I used the StarTools repair tool, option redistribute, average brightness for core location, and the three stars became one. So in my book, the processing brought the stars closer back to their ‘real’ appearance. You could argue that I shouldn’t be imaging with such a poorly optically optimised set up, but I did so for the reasons explained previously. I don’t care for 100% starless images, I would rather have them present, enhanced and manipulated, than leave them out altogether.

That is certainly one point of view. Yes it is fake in the sense that the original stars were much more numerous and suffered from optical artefacts. The stars were reduced and reshaped to (in my opinion) create a more pleasing image of the Veil Nebula than if I had left them untouched. It raises the question of how far do you go? Is it OK to correct eggy or slightly trailed stars, but if the software can fix more serious defects do you use it or consign the data to the bin and wait another 3 weeks for a clear night? If I lived in Atacama I'm sure I would rely more on the raw data and would certainly have the clear sky time to fettle the optics to wring out their best performance. Until then I will continue to use all of the processing tools available to me, but hopefully to create a result that still owes more to the raw data than AI, and we all know how fast that technology is developing. I took Olly's advice and "fixed" the offending Epsilon Cygni, now posted in the Deep Sky imaging section. Yes, the collimation (sensor tilt) is off, and maybe the focus, hence the reliance on the software fixes.

This is 50 x 3 mins with the SY135/RC571c/NBZ. Main processing centred on trying to fix some horrendous star shapes on the LHS, so full use made of BlurXterminator and the Star Repair module in StarTools.

Phenomenal result, incredible that it is only 9.6 hrs total integration.

I imaged the Veil Nebula last night with my SY135/RC571c/NBZ combination and with my usual philosophy of "get an image rather than spend the clear sky time tinkering with the kit", I put up with some terrible star shapes on the LHS of the image. No problem, I thought, BlurXterminator and Startools Repair module will sort them out, and to be fair they did a reasonable job. However when zooming in to look at how well they had worked their magic I discovered they had done this to Epsilon Cygni: This is what it looked like on the original stacked image: The software has managed to convert the flares from the brightest star in the image into a very convincing PN! It is strange that the software has done a good job in tidying up all of the other stars in the image but this one was just a step too far...

Well, my 2022 Astro session note book had a few blank pages left in it come December 31st, but this year’s copy only has three unused pages left. So, assuming the printer didn’t skimp on the paper for the 2023 edition, then either: a) there have been more clear nights in 2023, or b) I have been more inclined to get off the sofa and get out there when the clouds are absent.

Sorry, this is of no use to folks who have gone the IF route, but if other folks are looking at on axis guiding options there is the dual sensor camera from ZWO, this might be a cheaper alternative if you need to purchase an imaging camera? https://www.firstlightoptics.com/zwo-cameras/zwo-asi-2600mc-duo-usb-30-cooled-colour-self-guiding-camera.html

+1 for Eddington Lodge, stayed there a few years back and the facilities and skies were great. Of course it is a UK location so clear skies cannot be guaranteed.

Here is a moderate crop of the full FOV, WR-134 in Cygnus, 84 x 3 mins with the RASA8/QHY268c/NBZ combination. Calibrated and stacked in APP, processed in PI and AP.

A while ago I was worried about dust build up on my RASA corrector plate and wondered if I should clean it. Well this is what I found when I was checking for dew on the plate after an unattended session last night. The shim must have fell off my other camera when unscrewing after a previous session some months ago and it has been there ever since. I can’t see any obvious artefacts on the subs with it sitting there but the next session with it now removed will confirm this.