Lee_P

Thanks for sharing, this is a new one to me! Both images are great, I think the first one gets my vote though. 

46 minutes ago, vlaiv said:

Oh, this is so depressing

Whenever I make true color processing - it just does not look attractive

What do you prefer in the image, true color rendition or uber saturated version

"Uber saturated" for me - I want to make something I like the look of, first and foremost. For me, scientific accuracy is important, but secondary. 

47 minutes ago, newbie alert said:

Is this a variation on mark Shelley arc sin hyperbolic stretch

I think it's a bit more than just that, but I'm not totally sure. https://ghsastro.co.uk/

39 minutes ago, DaveS said:

I'd have a look, but typical of PI's arrogance and determination to be as unlike anything else, cannot open a wretched Xisf file. Why can't it save a FITS like everyone else.

FITS version attached 😁

M13 integrated FITS.fit

14 minutes ago, ollypenrice said:

I'd love to look at the data but I've no chance of downloading that file other than via something like Dropbox. We communicate largely by pigeon here in rural France... 🤣

I'll have a look at the stretch though.

Olly

Maybe your pigeons can handle Google Drive? No worries if not! https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1FIaH7Tx1p5OekLac4fne8W4PzUQetux6?usp=sharing

3 hours ago, ollypenrice said:

There's a lot to like but the core is saturated or, at least, sufficiently stretched to have lost stellar resolution. Is the core like this in the linear data? I'd suspect it probably isn't so I think a more differentiated stretch would preserve more stellar separation in the core.

Personally, I'm not a fan of any ready-made stretches that I've tried but I don't know the one you used.

Olly

Thanks for the comment Olly, maybe I did over-stretch the core a tad. Attached is the integrated file, if you've time to have a crack at it yourself! By the way, GHS isn't a ready-made stretch, you've got full control over it. It's worth a look!

M13 integrated.xisf

Still waiting for Summer nebulae to rise, so I put a few weeks into this image of M13. More info on my website, and imaging details below the picture. Big thanks to @mike1485 and @Gunshy for making the excellent Generalised Hyperbolic Stretch (GHS) plug-in for PixInsight, which I used for this image.

* March to April 2022
* Bristol, UK (Bortle 8 )
* Telescope: Askar FRA400 f/5.6 Quintuplet APO Astrograph
* Camera: ZWO ASI 2600MC-PRO
* Filter: none
* Mount: Orion Sirius EQ-G
* Guide: William Optics 32mm; ZWO ASI 120MM Mini
* Control: ASIAIR Plus, ZWO EAF
* Software: PixInsight, Lightroom
* 480 x 120 seconds

Total integration time: 16 hours

By Lee Pullen

6 minutes ago, OK Apricot said:

I understand the idea that weight=bad, however, heavy as it is, isn't it the one time setting up on the tripod that it's weight becomes a "factor"? I've no issues with lifting weight or making appropriate transit storage in the van, so with that considered, for £300 more surely its worth getting the 6 over the 5? I'd be slightly in a dream world and lying if I said an SCT or large Mak wasn't an option in the future, which would be pushing the HEQ5. 

There's logic in what you say, but I'd recommend contacting your local astro society and seeing if you can actually handle an HEQ5 and EQ6. That'll really convey the difference, and then you can decide which is best for you. 

1 hour ago, OK Apricot said:

 I've since learned that family are going to help me towards my "dream" astronomy setup (not that I even know what that is yet!), which makes deciding on a mount even easier - the EQ6-R is gorgeous. 

The EQ6 is a brilliant mount, but very heavy, which will cause issues if you're designing a portable set-up. FWIW I think you were on the right track with the HEQ5, which is a good match for an 80ED. 

I agree with Olly that you may find a dedicated astrocamera with a method of control (such as an ASIAIR) easier to use (and better) than a DSLR. But as Jim says, if you already own a DSLR then it may make sense to start with that.

I also agree with Olly about imaging from home being a lot easier than travelling. You'll get loads more imaging time, which can make up for your light-polluted skies. (Trees and houses blocking your sky would still be an issue though!) An OSC camera plus dual-band filter is relatively simple and can be effective from a city. There's some content on my website that you may find useful (I image from my city centre back garden), and you may find this article interesting.

I think you're on the right track with a wide-field refractor, they're robust and good fun.

-Lee

23 hours ago, callisto said:

Love wide shots like this 

 

Mark.

18 hours ago, tomato said:

Bravo for rising to the challenge of imaging  a broadband target like M51 from a Bortle 8 location.👍

5 hours ago, simmo39 said:

Nice, the Askar scores again!

Thanks all! I find the shot a bit underwhelming, but perhaps interesting and useful as an example of what this target looks like with a small refractor. It's got me lusting after a bigger 'scope though 😝

Given that I use a wide-field refractor, galaxy season doesn't exactly fill me with joy, but I managed to bag the Whirlpool Galaxy during the clear skies we recently enjoyed in south-west UK. More info on my website, and imaging details are below the image.

* March 2022
* Bristol, UK (Bortle 8 )
* Telescope: Askar FRA400 f/5.6 Quintuplet APO Astrograph
* Camera: ZWO ASI 2600MC-PRO
* Filter: none
* Mount: Orion Sirius EQ-G
* Guide: William Optics 32mm; ZWO ASI 120MM Mini
* Control: ASIAIR Plus, ZWO EAF
* Software: PixInsight, Lightroom, Topaz DeNoise AI
* 1200 x 120 seconds

Total integration time: 40 hours

By Lee Pullen

Great image!

This is great, good job!

Just on the topic of ink tanks vs cartridges, I was recently in the market for a new photo printer, and opted for a cartridge model over ink tanks. The ink in cartridges or tanks will be at its best for approx. a year after it's opened (at least that's what the knowledgeable chap at Wex said). I estimated how much ink I'd use in a year, and it came out as about cartridge level; nowhere near ink tank level. So, if you're going to be producing loads of prints, as Olly is, then ink tanks are great. If not, then cartridges may still be a better option.

That's some serious kit, and already a great result! 

Cygnus Astro Covers are very good. I've reviewed them here: https://urbanastrophotography.com/index.php/2021/10/11/review-cygnus-astro-cover/

When I need to post images directly onto sites like Facebook, I output them as longest size 2048px, and 72dpi. Seems to work ok 🤞

7 hours ago, ollypenrice said:

For me the real choice would be between OSC with optional dual band filter and mono. OSC on its own is quite restrictive.

Just highlighting Olly's comment here, because I totally agree and think it's important to note.

I've written about this on my website, you might find it useful: https://urbanastrophotography.com/index.php/2021/06/12/osc-vs-mono-from-a-city/

Great, can't wait to try this out. Many thanks! 

On 20/02/2022 at 07:40, simmo39 said:

V nice! 

Thanks! How are you getting on with your Askar FRA400? 

Great pic, and I particularly like the framing. 

Hi all, here's a new astrophoto to add to my collection of OSC images taken from Bristol City Centre. No filters used for this one. Imaging details below, and more info on my website here: https://urbanastrophotography.com/index.php/2022/02/19/the-double-cluster/

* February 2022
* Bristol, UK (Bortle 8 )
* Telescope: Askar FRA400 f/5.6 Quintuplet APO Astrograph
* Camera: ZWO ASI 2600MC-PRO
* Filter: none
* Mount: Orion Sirius EQ-G
* Guide: William Optics 32mm; ZWO ASI 120MM Mini
* Control: ASIAIR Plus, ZWO EAF
* Software: PixInsight, Lightroom, Topaz DeNoise AI
* 450 x 120 seconds

Total integration time: 15 hours

Welcome to SGL!

Hello and welcome! We're not that far away, I'm in Bristol.