The Admiral

Newton's rings will be more evident with light sources having a line spectrum rather than a continuous one. Out of interest, are you using a fluorescent light or is it daylight? Ian

Ah yes, hadn't thought of that. The camera will be static so the foreground shouldn't be blurred, but I guess overexposure might be an issue. Ian

Surely it doesn't really matter whether it's a very wide angle lens or is multi-panel mosaic, so long as both celestial poles are in the image. Ian

But do note that although Cuiv mentions encoders, IIRC, I understand that this is essential for servo motor control in a feedback loop. It is not I believe the same as encoders used at the output from the harmonic drive, so it wouldn't correct for the variations which are characteristic of the harmonic drive. To be fair to Cuiv, this is really what he says. Anyway, I am no expert in guiding nor do I have extensive experience with my AM5, but like others I've found guiding generally in the range 0.5"-0.8" using a 50mm x 200mm guide scope, multi-star guiding, and with a 0.5s guide exposure. The load is only about 5kg, and I use the carbon fibre tripod with a ballast of a few kilos. It is advised to use a short guide exposure of 0.5-1.0s guide exposure on account of the rapid switch-backs one can get with harmonic drive errors, though I've seen folk using longer without a problem. I haven't tried longer exposures myself. Ian

It's here: Ia

Cuiv the Lazy Geek has some videos where he fitted a 6" SCT with a hyperstar set-up. Worth a watch for background information. He seems to get good results, but he does say that his C6 is a good sample. https://youtu.be/1JeHARZP-Wc?si=abEGjiE3Tt7PBh5D Not for me I'm afraid, unless the RASA6 is made available separately. But if it were, is the Celestron able to use different cameras? If not, then as an ASIAir user I wouldn't be able to run it. Ian

When I was fiddling around in Siril to add Ha to a wide band image, I came across this filter function 'Contrast-Limited Adaptive Histogram Equalization (CLAHE)'. It really perked up the Ha channel before combining. Perhaps worth a look. Ian

How many imagers find an aircraft in their frames when imaging the Sun/Moon? And given that those objects are only about a half degree across, one might think that is unlikely too, but it happens. So is getting a big payout on the premium bonds! Ian

Well, to play devil's advocate, may be the exposure terminated before the tail light could be imaged! 😉 Ian

I'm not sure that the FoV is wide enough to capture the wingtips. Ian

I somehow doubt that current manufacturers will still be around in 40 years. I know I won't be 😊. Ian

Forgive me for asking Elp, but we're you not complaining of a slow preview with the new (v2) software? Fine on the old v1.9 software, but then slowed significantly following the update. If not you, I certainly recall a lot of chatter about this. I don't think the delays were a large as the OP has found though. Ian

Does Stellarmate have a polar align function, or more specifically, an all star polar align function for when the Polar regions are not visible? Ian

No, your description is fine, it's just that I didn't read it properly 🥴. As a PI user, then presumably you employed the Russel Croman scripts? Just looking for a reason why my Askar FRA400 results (not processed in PI) for the Pelican don't look half as good 😊. But then I only managed half the imaging time as yours, so that will explain it! Ian

Certainly has impact! Was that an artificial S or did you mean HOO? Looking at the title, though, I guess not. What sort of light pollution level do you have? Ian

No you haven't, it's a rather nice disk. Reticulation nicely revealed, and I like the colour. Hone your skills for eclipses and transits. Ian

Nice! Ian

I usually say that imaging is 20% data collection, 80% processing. Processing can have a profound effect on the appearance of an image; it can make or break an image. That probably explains a lot 😉. Ian

When I started I used DSS and StarTools (https://www.startools.org/). This is not expensive and can give good results, although to be fair it has a rather unique modus operandi (or should that be operandum 🙂 ), which you may or may not take to. I now don't use it as I feel it's too much of a black box, and for my stacking and processing I'm now using Astro Pixel Processor (https://www.astropixelprocessor.com/). As a subsidiary, I'm also migrating to Siril but I've not been very active of late so my Siril experience is taking a while to gain. If you do conventional photography as well, then you might take a look at Affinity Photo, which is also capable of astro processing. Don't forget that you can get a trial period for all this software, so it's worth trying things out to see what you find easiest (less complicated 😉). There are lots of videos around to help you with these bits of software, but the ones I find most helpful are by Nebula Photos and Deep Space Astro. Ian

I've thought it was the guide camera pixels, but I've never been sure about this. I'll be interested to know the answer to this too. Ian

How far out are they? One would imagine that it ought not be too bad with wide-field set-ups. Mind you, with a 533 sensor the FoV isn't so wide field. Ian

Fantastic shots once again Paul. The cliff looks horrendously treacherous even during the daytime, one slip and there's a long way to fall! I hesitate to comment to a master of his art, but I find the light painted foregrounds too bright and compete with the wonderfully captured MW. In the second shot I feel a crop off the sides to give a squarer format would be better too. Probably just me, each to his own. Please don't feel offended. Ian

That I'm afraid is always the problem. I find that too. The difficulty you have is getting over that hump that without some initial knowledge, it's knowing what you are looking for. There is a broad range of applications ranging from free, quite cheap, quite expensive, and very expensive. Start with what you already have or can be had for nothing. Then, when you've gained a bit of experience, you can move on to something you'll find more in keeping with the way you work. Astro imaging is essentially about photography, and some primarily photo processing software can be put to astro use. GIMP and Photoshop fall into that category, as does Affinity Photo, which has some astro processing elements built in. You can get Plug-ins for the both affinity and Photoshop (? also GIMP) designed expressly for astro imagers. Star Tools is a dedicated astro imaging program, and isn't too expensive, but has a different and perhaps oblique user interface. SIRIL is also dedicated to astro imaging, and is free, but does need some experience I feel. Choose a piece of software you think you'll get on with, look at all the YouTube guides you can, and just jump in and see what you can do. Never mind if it doesn't seem to work well, just keep practising. That's how we all started. Ian

That's because the ASIAir is automatically stretching the image to make it visible. If you slide the white slider at the bottom to the right, the image will darken and will appear like you are seeing in ASI Studio. If you click the 'AUTO' button it will automatically stretch the image again. As part of your post-processing, you have to stretch the stacked image. ASI Studio isn't really intended for post-processing. What are you using for that? There is a range of software that can be used for that, some free and others very expensive. Have a Goggle around. Ian