Jump to content

Narrowband

TakMan

Members
  • Posts

    916
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by TakMan

  1. Yet another play, this time around 40mins worth (!) and tried stand-a-lone StarNet++ on OSX... hence the star halo artefacts 🤨 but we're getting there. 21x 1200 seconds, Chroma 3nm Ha, Dark and flat frame calibrated (and aligned/stacked in APP). FSQ106ED @ f/5 - Atik 16200M (running at -20ºC) Pleased with how the camera is performing and the new filters... Damian Do the clicky thing for the full size jpeg (slight crop after stacking)
  2. Now with 20 subs - again, a quick process (no time for StarNet++), before bed.... just grabbed another 6 exposures tonight between the clouds... aborted 2 nearing completion - the 'joys' of 20min subs! Thankfully, no Windows 7, BSOD - looks like I sorted that. Still no flats, that's the next task one cloudy night... Damian Do the clicky thing for the full size jpeg - a small amount of stack cropping only
  3. I like that - amazing what amateurs can achieve under all that atmosphere! 👍
  4. A Chroma LRGB 50mm unmounted filter set came today courtesy of FLO's Black Friday Special Offers - £160 off..... well I say that, I held off purchasing on that day, re-visited Wednesday just gone and the saving had gone up to £304 - so I decided to grab 'em while I could !
  5. Folks, what is considered the best way of combining data sets from different camera/scope combinations, these days...? Since changing camera, I've revisited old targets to not only see how the new gear stands up to the old, but also to compare how my guiding and image acquisition has improved over the years. So, as an example, I have decent (in focus, clean, etc), Ha data sets of the California Nebula from: FSQ106ED/Focal Reducer/SBIG 8300m - 2.88" arch sec/pixel, 7nm Baader. 23x 600sec and FSQ106ED/Atik 16200m - 2.33" arch sec/pixel, 3nm Chroma. 20x 1200sec Using APP (or Nebulosity 4,) should I (once both data sets have been calibrated with their own respective flat/dark flats/darks), either: 1) combine the 8300m and 16200m light frame sets individually and then stack the master 8300 and 16200 light sets..? or... 2) stack all the calibrated lights in one go..? And in the correct, or in each case above, is there a preferred way of combining (the type of sigma rejection, or weighting, etc...)...? I suppose this is one for Vlaiv (!), but I await your 'combined' thoughts! Thanks in advance, Damian
  6. Really nice second go Bryan - you've got a fine combination with the rusty gold and teal blue in that image. I still have my 8300 camera (in an SBIG body). Like Martin said, as long as you can overpower the inherent noise, the sensor performs (especially with a guide dither and decent calibration frames). I went with the reducer on the FSQ to get it down to f/3.6 and 10 min exposures, you took the slightly longer exposure route (but retained the full bandpass of the narrowband filters) and the result paid off. I always found the image from 18-25 subs produced a decent picture and then the quality visibly jumped again with around 30-40 subs (which was about my limit before I wanted to collect data from the other filters!) From the sounds of it, with a CMOS camera, you could probably achieve the same result in two thirds of the time.... but some of that saved 'other third', if using the CMOS device would have been needed for the extended processing time of your computer/software - whilst dealing with all the extra shorter subs.... and then being on Amazon choosing (and then saving onto), the additional back-up device for all that extra data! Never a free lunch in this game, hey! Clear skies... Damian
  7. Very nice image Martin. Lovely flat background and rich, yet unforced colour and details. Without sounding nitpicking, can I ask if your data suffered from halos (I would think unlikely with Chroma filters), or is the 'smooth halo' around the bigger stars (see attachment) an artefact from using StarNet or something..? I think I've seen this before and perhaps some posts on how to add back the 'grain'.... there might even be something over on CN where someone was asking Russell Croman if he could add the 'noise' back in with his own star removal plugin...? Just asking really. Season's Greetings and Clear skies... Damian
  8. Very nice. The twist tie hasn't detracted too much from the final image... in fact (as Ollie would say), it's produced these 'inverted lighthouse beams' that you get with the Baby Tak FSQ85 - so you've (sort of) 'upgraded' your WO Redcat!!! Clear skies... Damian
  9. That’s a delight Richard! I’d perhaps (as per the first post), just temper the background stars a tad to lift /separate the foreground cluster… then an anti-clockwise 90 degree rotation, crop down a bit onto said cluster… and bingo, you have a perfect ‘Christmas Tree’ shape to make your own festive cards! But forgetting the Christmas card idea, a super shot, lovely flat field and great colours…. D
  10. A 15 minute Photoshop process of some captured data - first go with the new Chroma 50mm unmounted narrowband set after returning the Baader CMOS Ultras. Just 8x 1200 seconds, 3nm Ha, Dark frame calibrated (and aligned/stacked in APP), only as haven't got around to sorting flats. FSQ106ED @ f/5 - Atik 16200M (running at -20ºC) Have not been able to remove the tilt in the upper left corner... 😕 But have been able to resolve 🤞 the more frequent occurrences of Windows 7 BSOD (Blue Screen Of Death), which put paid to the last few clear nights we've had - hence 8 frames rather than the 16-20 that would have been nice 😀 As I'm Mac based it's been a struggle to work out this issue... I really should have read all the instructions when I switched over the gear from my old MacBook Pro to the Wife's old Windows laptop after she upgraded (I wanted a more integrated solution than what I had available on OSX - Platesolving, auto-dithering, etc). The BSOD happened again even after a complete reinstall of W7, all the software and drivers... then re-configuring the software, etc, etc - I was starting to pull my hair out with it! When I was on Mac, it was recommended to use the Keyspan 19HS serial>usb connector (something to do with the FTDI chipset and the cheaper solutions that use the Prolific). Unfortunately it appears that when the Keyspan is used with the Temma Ascom Driver, this is just about guaranteed to cause BSOD - it's mentioned in the ruddy instructions, I just didn't think when I moved everything over !!!!! 🤬 Ran 6 hours of dark frames last night in the garage with everything hooked up, PHD2 looping, planetarium running, mount connected, powered and synced to a star - but not tracking (despite what CduC thought) with me keeping an eye on it all via TeamViewer. All, so far..... appears good - ready for the next clear night, whenever that might be! Perhaps I might even get a decent 5-6 hr run at things next time out ! 😉 Clear skies to you all - we have plenty of snow here though and the "two clear hours" that Clear Outside is telling me are imminent are definitely not looking promising!!! 🤪 Damian
  11. If you were going with the Epsilon, then I'd have said take a look on CN 'Experienced Imaging' and take a look at the 'Who's using Astronomic High Speed Filters..?', or something to that effect. They look pretty good for the money. Only 'issue' would be if mixing with other brand LRGB filters as they are only 1mm thick, so could be an issue for focusing... or using an OAG. I went with 50mm unmounted Chroma's** (in case I ever want to go to full frame). Will save for the LRGB - if I deem that my location justifies the expense of broadband imaging (or just enjoy narrowband) and then go to the Lunar/Solar kit once we move into Galaxy Season. **Can't say I've had the opportunity to test yet what with the weather!!!
  12. Jesus, that’s worse than mine (which I sent back) - Baader certainly ‘found a way’, not sure what ‘way’ they were looking for, just not halo reduction! 😳
  13. I was under the impression that dithering not only helped imagers with CCD tech - hot/cold pixels, column defects etc, but fixed pattern noise and banding for those using CMOS. I recollect reading either on here or CN that banding (and perhaps fixed pattern noise, although perhaps it is one and the same..?) could be more of an issue if using very short sub exposures (say 60 seconds) with CMOS based cameras and so a ‘big’ dither was more of a requirement…. A bigger dither (in my own experience), would require a reasonable amount of settle time (this is purely to acknowledge my argument with regards to download times being in the most part a non-issue). I run my mount with 2-3 second exposures, so it takes time for PHD2 to adjust the guide star to the new lock position and steady the guiding. Perhaps a Mesu would be quicker, but whatever. I fully appreciate that CMOS is the way forward, more sensitive, lower nose thresholds, etc. I just find the argument that CMOS is ‘better’ than CCD from a download perspective rather nonsensical….. A bit like those that peddle the idea that PixInsight is so much better than good ole Ps because it’s, amongst other things…. ‘maths based’. All I ever see is equations thrown around as if to justify that it must be…. ‘better’ …. For some reason, both the CCD/CMOS and PI/Ps arguments remind me of the old Amiga/Atari ST playground battles and for some reason this old advert…. But perhaps that’s just me! An argument for another thread and another day! Damian
  14. My Atik 16200 takes a lengthy 18 seconds to download a full 1xBin frame, so I 2xBin for platesolving and running autofocus which speeds up things considerably. When I switched over from Mac to Windows, solely for the purpose of data acquisition, I ran a few tests with CCDciel and got in touch with the developer, Patrick, with a few ideas based on my experience using (and having been a beta tester for the old Microprojects Equinox Image OSX software). Patrick was not only open to new ideas/features, he was very helpful and happy to help implement them (as long as I was happy to help test!) My best idea was to make use of the long download of each light frame of my ‘new to me’ Atik - allowing the software to send the dither command to the mount as soon as CCDciel recorded that the exposure had ended. I always gave the mount 20 seconds to dither and settle before starting the next exposure. Now the 18 seconds for my Atik to download is used efficiently to perform that task, so I only ‘waste’ an extra 2 seconds for the mount to settle. In fact the exposure could start immediately, I have chosen to add that extra time just so the there is no USB conflict between the download and the guide exposures…. I’m sure the new CMOS cameras are ‘better’ than the sensor in my camera, but the argument of download speed is somewhat mitigated for me. Even if I changed sensor to one that downloaded in a second or so, I’d still want another 10 just to allow the guiding to settle…. so that means I’m currently only loosing out by 8-9 seconds, nothing in the grand scheme of things when each exposure is 10-20 minutes. And thinking about it, if you’re running 2-5 minute CMOS exposures and dithering after each, then waiting for the mount to settle, the difference between CMOS and CCD, purely in the ‘download speed’ argument is a none issue….. Damian
  15. Thanks for the reply Richard. Bortle 4 - your image is even more impressive! Excellent capture and processing skills. D
  16. That’s lovely, colours and composition. The icy blues with the rust red really make it. Can I ask, what are your skies like (Bortle), etc and do you use a LP filter in the imaging train…? D
  17. Yes, same here - can’t read the Polish…! It is worth scanning through the pages though on their forum. From the odd meme and image posting, I get the feeing folks aren’t impressed. The OIII filter appears to have halos even worse than the old 8nm filter… how is that possible..!? What with the (smaller) Ha halo, the massive OIII one and none on the SII, plus your issues and other’s postings of halos on this filter… or that…. no rhyme or reason to which filter was going to produce a halo, well, my confidence in the new CMOS filters was knocked. With not knowing where the transmission of the Ha and SII was truly centred upon, or how efficient the filters actually are, then the ‘we have found a way’ message might just as well be a load of marketing rubbish rather than an acknowledgment of better filter performance… Although significantly cheaper than ‘the alternative’, the set of mounted 2” Baader’s was still over £900. The only good thing was that it showed me what the difference really is (with my own gear rather than just reading about it), investing in a narrower bandpass. D
  18. I sent mine back to FLO and am about to go ‘Chroma’… There is some chatter over on CN, that may well link to Adam’s issue of the non-existent Squid… that the ultra fast OIII isn’t transmitting at the correct wavelength..? See: https://www.cloudynights.com/topic/791682-oiii-filter-and-star-halos/ And the link to the Polish forum that ran the test that CN links to: https://astropolis.pl/topic/68677-obiektywny-test-porównawczy-filtrów/page/11/?tab=comments#comment-923039 Damian
  19. Inspired by Adam's earlier posting, decided to process some old data whilst waiting for the wife to finish marking... 8x 1200sec subs (so similar time to Adam's as well): 4 with the older 7nm Baader and another 4 with the 3.5nm CMOS version (dark and flat calibrated). FSQ106ED @ f/5 - Atik 16200 Pre-processed in APP. Processed in PsCC2017 with stand-a-lone StarNet++ (on Mac). Just having yet another play... on yet another cloudy night.... wife says it should be called the 'Poppy Nebula' as it resembles that more! Click for the hi-res - 100% with a small amount of stacking artefact cropping. Damian
  20. I also forgot to mention Ian, that if you are intending to use your new Tak on the GEM, then I would consider the CAA for it to easily and safely adjust the diagonal. I have found this useful both when the scope is mounted on a GEM or alt/az mount. Lastly, a quick release for the finder aids easy storage. FLO stock the ADM one. I had the original BTTechnologies version, which although works, I found a bit notchy. The Tak one is much nicer… but is more than twice the price! I’ll leave spending your money there - enjoy the scope! D
  21. Congratulations and clear skies to you! My TSA is my best corrected and sharpest scope, although I enjoy the increased aperture of the TEC which now gets the most use. The 102 also makes a cracking solar scope (both white light) as well as Ha viewing (and imaging) with a Quark. And like Jeremy, I also recommend the BBHS diagonal... or the TV Everbright - use both. I also found the addition of the MEF-3 micro focuser nice. Perhaps the FeatherTouch micro-pinion may have been an even better option...? Folks may say it isn't required at f/8, but I liked that extra finesse it gave.... Perhaps some things to mull over, research once you are more familiar with your new toy! Damian
  22. Found some pics from the same IAS show as Dave - early June 2014... Here, Mark had one of the few early Half Hitch FTX mounts that made it into the UK. As I recall, he'd wanted to 'chrome it up' to match the scope, but the guy who made the mount, the late Charles Riddle, didn't give his permission for that to happen. Still, mount and scope complement each other here... Damian
  23. Another option (upon those suggested above), is a TeleVue 'Equaliser' - something I use if switching from a heavy Ethos to a 1.25" eyepiece... https://www.televue.com/engine/TV3b_page.asp?id=23&Tab=_equil
×
×
  • 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.