Jump to content

sgl_imaging_challenge_6_banner_jupiter_2021.jpg.eacb9f0c2f90fdaafda890646b3fc199.jpg

 

 

redmoo

Members
  • Posts

    130
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by redmoo

  1. I think most people try and stay true to the colours that actually exist. Sure, you have light polltution filters etc, but most of the processing in PS is to try and get the colours back to where they were. One major exception to this is the narrowband images that you see, where each colour represents a different 'gas'. I mean, you could look at it that all the pictures taken on earth aren't really 'true' colours, as the lighting around them makes a huge difference (just look at the blue/black or white/gold dress thing that has been going around as of late). Are monochrome images more realistic? I guess that would depend on your target! Anyway, so long as it looks good!
  2. Another Warrington person! I'm not sure about the 550d, but I have the 1100d and no you can't. You can set it up to take lots of pictures which you can then turn into a video in PIPP (again, free software) and then process it that way. There is a HD video option if you pay for APT, but I can't get that to work properly. What scope are you using?
  3. Hey! What software are you using to capture? I personally use Sharpcap, and with that, you can usually adjust the gain on the camera. Also, increasing the FPS usually lowers the brightness too. Im not a planetary person, but someone will be along soon to give you proper advice as to the exact settings that you need! Good luck
  4. Did you just remove the back filter and leave the front one in place or did you remove both? If you only removed the back one, you don't need the IR/UV cut as you have effectively left that in the camera already. I only use my camera for AP, so can't comment on the autofocus stuff!
  5. The advantage of using a higher ISO is that you can do shorter subs to get to the same saturation. This then gives you more subs to play with and reduces the chances that you lose a sub due to tracking errors etc. I'm no expert in this, just re iterating information that I have read on here and I have found it works for me.
  6. Yeah, I got out and was cloud dodging to get Jupiter a few nights ago, but was horrible seeing. As for targets, I am going to have another go at the horsehead in Ha (due to the moon). I have got it before, but my scope was way out of collimation. Just re did it last night so hopefully it will last a day!
  7. I guess it depends on the filters that you are using and the light pollution type that is in your area. The new LED lights are a nightmare for LRGB imaging. Some of the RGB filters have a gap between the red and the green filters to drop out the 589 line from sodium lamps. Don't know what you would do about lum though!
  8. When you use a mono camera, you need some sort of filter in there, be it an LRGB set or a narrowband set. These filter out the LP on their own as each filter will only let through a certain bandwidth of light. That is next on my list. Which camera did you go for?
  9. I managed to get a second hand 1100D on ebay for 99 pound. It didnt have a lens, but I didn''t need one! I modded it myself and now getting used to taking pics. It can be done, and then if you decide to go further you can always go down the CCD route. I would never of thought of trying to mod it myself if it was worth a lot of money, but at less than 100 pound, was worth a punt and it worked (although not a walk in the park!) Good luck
  10. First tip would be start saving for a guiding solution! That will be where you want to be going next. I use an 1100d, and stick to iso 1600 most of the time. Biggest problem with DSO photography is that it costs so damn much! You always want that next bit of gear.....and chances are it will be cloudy....FOREVER (at least that's how it seems to me) Get used to getting pics. Depending on your polar align, I think you can get upto 5 mins unguided, although most people cap out at ~2 mins. Galaxies are pretty faint, so you might be able to get a few of the brigher ones (andromeda, M81 etc) but after that you will need to be guided. Nebulas are the same. If your camera is unmodded, you are going to need pretty long subs to see all the feint detail. Practice really does help though, so if I were you, I would spend lots of time doing the brigher DSO's and getting used to the setup and processing etc. Good luck!
  11. Hi there and welcome to SGL! That is pretty normal for deep sky images. A things that helped me when starting out:- Use a higher ISO:- I think most people suggest either 800 or 1600. I have the 1100d and find that 1600 works really well. Shoot flat frames:- This will sort out the gradient that you are seeing. Flat frames are basically a baseline picture for your imaging train. You shoot a flat white light source (there are many different ways of doing this) and then DeepSkyStacker creates a 'flat' light image and then processes these differences out of your actual images. It will also take care of a lot of dust motes etc, but the picture seems pretty free from that. In order to shoot the flat frames correctly, you need to do it without removing the camera from telescope....or anything from the telescope for that matter! Good luck!
  12. Which size LP filter did you buy? I had a similar issue recently with a 2" filter. Needed a different T ring connector for the camera (T ring to 2" connector) and the LP filter fitted on the end of that. There are probably other ways to do it, but this one seems the simplest.
  13. Another option for focussing would be a bahtinov mask. Works wonders! You can either buy one or make your own.
  14. As mentioned above, it depends on what type of astrophotography you are going for. For deep sky objects (Nebulas and Galaxies), you need to do long exposures, and on an ALT/AZ mount, the rotation of the earth causes star trails. For this reason, you need a decent motorized EQ mount. AP is a slippery, expensive slope. But if you do decide to take the plunge, go for a decent mount first, and think of the future....because chances are, you will want to upgrade pretty soon!
  15. Just echoing this. The first time you get guiding to work, the first time you take a picture or see a planet. The first time the wife says 'Why don't you get another telescope'......although I might of dreamt that last one.
  16. Are you interested in using it for daytime photography as well? You can vastly increase the sensitivity of the Canon cameras by removing the internal IR filter. This filter block a lot of the Hydrogen Alpha wavelengths, which is very abundant in astrophotography (especially nebulas). However, simply removing the filter is anything but simple! Most people pay someone else to do it, and get the filter replaced with a transparent piece of glass (meaning the camera can still be used for daytime pictures with a removable filter). So, as a short answer, yes, it is suitable. There are great software options to control Canon cameras, and if you choose to go further, even more options start to arise!
  17. Looks good! Should of attached a huge fan onto it though, ya know, to move the clouds.
  18. There is a post over on the DIY astronomer where someone made their own guide rings by ordering some aluminium pipe (ready cut) off Ebay. Might be worth taking a look over there. Another option would be Astroboot, but I dont know how small you would need the rings to be in order to use them.
  19. Might be over doing it a bit, but you won't know until you try! I don't know what is considered a good amount of variation in PHD2, but I am usually within 1°. All depends on what you are after. You should be able to get sensible results, but the next step might be a bigger mount
  20. I fitted a bar on top of the main scope tube rings (not a dovetail, just a thin but rigid flat steel bar). I guess you could use aluminium to keep the weight down. Mine is a ST80 though, so a little bigger, but I don't see why it wouldn't work with a guidescope.
  21. I had no problems reaching focus with a DSLR and a 127 mak. I did have a low profile T ring adapter though, so it is a valid point made above! But yeah, when you are relying on ALT/AZ mount to just 'track', it does have a mind of its own!
  22. You can always go second hand. A lot of astronomers take really good care of their equipment. I got mine second hand with a 200p scope for 500 pound. Mint condition and tracks really nice. They do appear every now and again, but they are usually snapped up pretty fast!
  23. It amazes me what people can achieve in less than ideal conditions, let alone trying to take a picture of something that is millions of miles away, through a window, with a street light. Nice one.
  24. Ahh ok! That's called A-focal astrophotography (taking pictures with the eyepiece in place). I take it you can see it through the eyepiece yourself? You should try doing some moon shots or maybe even some of Jupiter!
  25. Just a quick note, you don't need a UV blocking filter if you are not using a refractor. As a general rule, UV is no use to AP photos, and with refractors, the UV focus is all out of whack (which gives you star bloat). With reflectors, it isnt so much of a problem. Don't think it does anything for the pictures, but no big deal. I am only relaying information that I have read on here and little bits that I came across when I modded my camera.
×
×
  • 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.