Jump to content

Stargazers Lounge Uses Cookies

Like most websites, SGL uses cookies in order to deliver a secure, personalised service, to provide social media functions and to analyse our traffic. Continued use of SGL indicates your acceptance of our cookie policy.

sgl_imaging_challenge_banner_christmas_presents.thumb.jpg.587637e0d01baf4b6d21b73610610bbb.jpg

pipnina

Advanced Members
  • Content Count

    1,266
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

pipnina last won the day on March 26 2018

pipnina had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

639 Excellent

4 Followers

About pipnina

  • Rank
    Sub Dwarf

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    Devon, England.
  1. Can you remember the integration time of the DSLR/OSC/MONO images? It would help judge the difference in effectiveness.
  2. Something I believe Ollypenrice has said before is that OSC cameras have bayer matrices that have twice as many green pixels as blue and red, which is not useful for astronomy since most of the colours we try to capture are blue and red! And in filtered mono images, green is often the colour left with the least exposure, not the most. An OSC camera also makes emission line filters useless. OSC might be worth it for planetary imaging but I don't see much appeal beyond that personally.
  3. Good sky tonight :D Got the imaging scope pointed at flame/horse/2023, and had a look all around with the visual scope! Clusters in gemini/auriga, nebulae in orion (maybe a glimpse of flame). Saw the andromeda galaxy as well as 81/82. Hoped to find Uranus but no luck :( Too much pollution to navigate the area properly and finders frosted up.

    Hope the rest of you got lucky too!

  4. I think a healthy dose of narrow and wide shots make a happy amateur astronomer. Seeing the finer details of filament and mottling in the flame nebula can be just as stunning as seeing it in place with the horsehead, NGC2023, M78 and the brightest patch of the loop all in one image. Just stunning in different ways. I do agree with Olly though, you can gain a better appreciation of say the Pleiades when it's in an image that stretches all the way to the California nebula, and has the background dust and gas showing between them. You get some extra perspective like looking at an entire cathedral vs admiring a single stained glass window.
  5. I'm not an expert, but I might hazard that the Celsius scale has been redefined for simplicity at some point. It doesn't really perform any hard scientific logic to where the scale starts and ends (since the properties Celsius represents at either end of the scale vary depending on the environment!) and if we had determined some base for 0°k, which is far more important scientifically, the SI people may well have just decided to round Celsius off for simplicity. That's just a theory, but it may have some truth to it since as you say such round numbers are not common in physics. The closest thing I can find to support this is that the "triple point" of water is 273.16°k (0.01°c). Perhaps they set the Celsius scale to that end?
  6. My experience has not been great. The LED bulbs they've put in where I am seem to be brighter than the old yellow lamps, not dimmer. On the counterpoint they do seem to direct that light downwards better than the old ones. If there is someone who does have good before/after photos, I'd love to see them.
  7. I have a target for tonight! I got a 55-200 lens for christmas and this is test #1. Beautiful night so far so finger's crossed! Also, your subs are better than my whole stacks!
  8. Something like this might provide a good surface to shoot at for flats? https://www.amazon.co.uk/32-Inch-Portable-Translucent-Collapsible-Reflector/dp/B002ZIVKAE/ref=sr_1_1_sspa?ie=UTF8&qid=1546970257&sr=8-1-spons&keywords=photographic+reflector&psc=1 Also, flats don't need a perfectly reflective surface because your lens should be focused at infinity while the target is considerably closer.
  9. How did you find collimation? It seems to be delivering some great results so I presume it went well?
  10. One of my favourite object pairs, and a lovely image of them at that! Well done
  11. A DSLR might not be the best way to start, but it is the cheapest! I got mine for only £230 pre-owned from London Camera Exchange. As much as I'd love a cooled CCD I wouldn't be imaging at all right now without my DSLR.
  12. Definitely not a bad first photo. Mine was a lot worse! You might get some good results with double stars if you have eyepieces with enough magnification if you want some extra target ideas.
  13. Nice image and a happy new year to you! Quite a convenience, I was just thinking about this target as you posted since hubble took a photo of the target only a few days ago, showing up on my feed today.
  14. That looks considerably better than what I got with my 130-PDS + Nikon D3200. This is two hours of exposure.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.