The Admiral

But isn't that always the case though Neil, which makes most software fairly impenetrable. And don't get me started on mobile 'phone user guides! I can well understand it when folk favour say, Photoshop or Pixinsight, for their step-wise logic processes, and I'm very much in that camp myself. It's why I opted for Picture Window Pro as my photo editor (far cheaper than PS, and every bit as powerful). When I got Lightroom, I lamented the lack of transparency where each tool did exactly what you expected of it. But after a while, it all becomes second nature. But the more complex the task, the greater the learning curve is with these logical apps. Startools (can) gets you to a good standard of output without a protracted process, but I still can't fathom what's going on! But unlike PI, it's so easy to 'play around' with the settings and see what happens. If you don't like it, cancel it and do it again or something else. I do like to know what each parameter does in each module, so that I can figure out what I need to do. As you say, the 'manual' doesn't help too much there, but I figure that it'll come to me by osmosis. Whichever way one goes, it's never going to be a quick assimilation. Stick with I'd say! I use autodev for the first development, to see where the issues lie and where I might need to crop, but after the wipe I do my re-stretch using develop and push it as far as I feel is right. Ian Edit. Have you seen the 'manual for StarTools? If you go to the home page, down the bottom is a link to 'PDF Document'. That takes you to a pdf manual.

Snap!! Makarian's Chain is my next target, so good luck with that, though I think you may well beat me to it as there are some cloud banks around, and probably high cirrus. Forecasts aren't good until well past midnight here. The clouds may melt away, but, if I can't make a start before 10.00pm I shall call it a night. I really want to be in bed by mid-night. Cinders or what? Where's me slippers! Ian

Ooh, I don't know about that, it's a very nice detailed image. Mine does come courtesy of the smoke 'n' mirrors that is Startools . It'll be interesting to see how you get on with the 9.25. If I had your arrangement I'd be asleep before the evening's out! What I do find tiring is all the waiting. Ian

Thank you Nige. I'll leave it at that! Well I must admit that after Saturday night's late nighter, I'm inclined to agree! I'm getting too old to cope with lack of sleep . Not only that, but with a predominantly SW to E outlook I'm running out of decent targets until the autumn. I think Nige must work through 'til dawn though! Ian

As per Nigel's suggestion, and at risk of flogging a dead horse, I've tried using the 'repair' module in ST to improve the shape of the stars (but not the ones in the galaxy as I lassoed the galaxy out). It does involve creating a star mask, not something I'm particularly familiar with in ST. I also took the opportunity to improve(?) the colour rendition. Final polish in Lightroom. Ian

Well done Steve, some difficult objects there. Ian

Just out of interest I thought I'd re-do my M88 image, but cropping down early in ST and not binning. Finished in Lightroom. Not bad, considering, but it does show my out-of-round stars . Ian

I did that, and I don't think that there is a lot of difference to be honest. They are not quite the same of course, I never can process to give the same look with ST, but if anything I think the stars are slightly sharper when I'm being more selective, rather than letting DSS decide. No sign of trails though. Ian

Thanks for that. I usually weed out the worst ones, then separately register using DSS, and select the highest scoring ones for stacking. I'm going to see what happens if I throw it all into DSS and let it munch its way through to the end. Ian

Thank you very much Nige. Most definitely Alt-Az . And it certainly has its limitations, but surmounting those is part of the challenge for me, and getting images that are as good as those using an EQ mount, within limitations, is what I'm aiming for. You seem to be mastering the art as well! Slowly getting there. Ian

Well, here are my best attempts so far from Saturday night/Sunday morning. The first is M5, using 52 subs of 30s, ISO1600. I stacked the best 18 frames in DSS and processed in ST. I had to reject a fair proportion affected by movement, and a surprising number of satellites and aircraft trails. The star at 7 o'clock is the mag5 star: 5 Ser-HIP74975. Here's a single frame of the more interesting rejects, primarily for the trail though it would have been rejected for movement as well. The second was M88. I took 148 subs of 30s, ISO1600, and stacked 79 in DSS, processed in ST. M88 is in the Virgo Galaxy Cluster, so there's plenty of other DSOs visible in the frame, including M91 top left and NGC4459 bottom right. NGC4459 is at the top of Makarian's Chain. All imaged using Altair Wave 102mm f7 SuperED APO, Fuji X-T1, Nexstar 6/8SE Alt-Az mount. Flats, darks and bias frames (~50 each) used. Ian

Thanks for those comments Paul Ian

No Nige, the tree didn't oblige, and unfortunately the object was about to disappear behind it! I ended up doing M88 and M5. And a very nice image you made of the Leo Triplet too, despite the dew. I didn't have any problem with dew last night, though it seemed a bit 'damper' after midnight. Ian

Well, after a pretty turbulent afternoon weather-wise, the skies eventually cleared and everything settled down, so out with the 'scope and set up. Slew to my first target and took a test frame to check on alignment. Pretty much centred, but what's that orange nebulosity? It's a tree! B****r. Ian

Oh Nige, on the subject of using a Barlow, I've been having a mental disussion with myself, and that is, will there be any benefit? On the one hand, you'll reduce the number of photons per pixel, which in term means more noise and therefore more exposure becomes necessary. Then, if you are already over-sampling (i.e. you've got a lot of pixels per star, with its size broadening due to seeing), will you get any higher resolution. Couple that with the magnification of mount movement. So all in all, I'm not sure. In fact I had planned to run a test the next time I image, as long as I've time available in the schedule. Ian

Another very nice capture Nige! You must be up well into the early hours, well past my bedtime . I couldn't agree with you more, and it is indeed a myth that you need a lot of expensive gear to do astrophotography. I think that to advise folk who want to start AP that this is necessarily so, is doing a great disservice to our hobby. There is so much to learn about the subject, as I'm finding out, before one even ventures into the realms of polar aligning, drift aligning, guiding, etc. Anyway, I'll get orf me soapbox now! Ian

Gosh you have been busy Nigel, and well rewarded too! Nice sharp stars and plenty of colour. I'd hoped to get some more subs on the Black Eye, but I think my chance has gone now, because I'm limited to about 50 degrees altitude with my mount. And last night's clear sky rather crept up on me and I didn't have the stamina to set up late in the evening. Hoping for some opportunity this evening. Ian

It's still turned out pretty good though. Can I ask an unrelated question? How good do you find the tracking of the Evo mount when used with the long focal length 9.25" ? Is it stable enough to do astrophotography on small objects do you think? Ian

That's a nice wide-field image Mike. I hadn't realised that there was so much dust around. Ian

Hi Nige, yes that is a very colourful and attractive image. Not sure how you managed it with the weather we've been having. Having just looked it up , the Flaming Star neb is both an emission nebula and a reflection nebula, and I can make out the 'smoke' of the reflection bit around, is it AE Aurigae, but the red emission neb I'm afraid I can't see, apart from a tiny smidgeon above the star to the right of AE Aurigae. Looking at pictures of the nebula this corresponds with a bright bit of the emission. I presume this is with the 200p, but even so it looks as though you're going to need more subs, and of course it is quite low. Not sure about the rest of it, but my money would be on noise. I can also see stacking artefacts along the RHS and also along the bottom. If you cropped those out then 'wipe' might leave a cleaner background I suppose, but as always, more photons is going to be your answer! If that's with the 200p, I'm not sure how I'd get on with a 100mm refractor. Ian

Nice capture. It is a small object isn't it, I must have a go myself when it's better placed for me. Interesting alignment of stars to its right. Ian

Looking at the enlarged image without any bright borders around it (i.e. the eye isn't overwhelmed), it looks as though the cluster is surrounded by a broad ring of cloud. I wonder if that is background noise, and the shaddowy spots in it are dust bunnies. It would be interesting to see what effect flats would have. I have also seen it written that too few darks can introduce noise of their own accord. For what it is worth, I (tediously) take as many dark frames as lights. Ian