Jump to content

sgl_imaging_challenge_banner_31.thumb.jpg.b7a41d6a0fa4e315f57ea3e240acf140.jpg

alexbb

Members
  • Content Count

    1,193
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

alexbb last won the day on September 12 2018

alexbb had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

1,789 Excellent

About alexbb

  • Rank
    Sub Dwarf

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    Romania, 45N

Recent Profile Visitors

6,730 profile views
  1. I saw the tremendous amount of data that you shared so I downloaded it and gave it a try. Thank you for making it available. Here's what I did (what I remember): In PixInsight Luminance Deconvolved the luminance layer Applied some TGV denoise with an inverted duplicated layer, stretched more than STF Stretched it partially with arcsin stretch Stretched it more with Histogram Transformation Duplicated it and applied HDR with an inverted duplicated layer, stretched more than STF. Kept this layer mask Combined 5 an
  2. Thank you, Margin and Craig! I sold the 200/1200 newton. At F/6 I never had issues with it, but it was too large for me to handle lately. I want to travel more so I downsized my gear. The bulkiest setup I use now is a dual 102 F/7 refractor setup on a GEM45. Also the EQ6-R went away, but I don't regret it compared to the GEM45 which is much lighter and more precise.
  3. This is another finished target for this season. I (quite) recently bought a TS Photoline 102 ED with FPL53 which performs surprisingly well for a doublet. So I put it to tests and imaging, in parallel with an older FPL51 AstroProfessional 102 ED doublet. The blue color correction is much better in the newer TS. I shoot luminance often with both and then take the highlights from the better scope. For this image I also used some older data that I had available, shot with a 130PDS, but that maybe only made my life more difficult. Not that otherwise I shot data through the refracto
  4. I've been mostly collecting data only lately, all waiting to be processed. I wanted to acquire more OIII on this from a dark site, but with the current COVID restrictions (it is forbidden to be out after 23) I abandoned the idea and instead I'm shooting something else. So I'm calling the latest rendition the final one. Fortunately, light collecting happens faster with a dual scope setup. You can find gear details and watch at higher resolution @astrobin.
  5. I couldn't try the other evening, but I managed this evening. I didn't follow any PixInsight tutorial as the math is simple, so I did it this way: integrated all the darks into a master-dark integrated all the flat darks into a flat-master-dark integrated all the flats into a master-flat calibrated the master-flat with the flat-master-dark and saved as master-flat-calibrated calibrated all the lights with the master-dark and master-flat-calibrated registered all the calibrated lights integrated all the registered calibrated lights You can vary
  6. Your welcome! I'll try this evening to calibrate the files in PixInsight and see what's not working properly.
  7. Very nice! I'm happy to hear that you managed to overcome the calibration issues.
  8. Thanks! There's not much to sort out for me though I'm not investing anymore in that mount. For me, Darkframe tuning was just a scam. Dave didn't seem to understand even the basic figures and graphics. Or maybe he did, but he just didn't bother. There seem to be plenty of happy people with their (hyper)tuned mounts, but there are also many upset people too. My advice for anyone is not to send their only mount for tuning. Many people wrote me, mostly on Facebook, telling me that they didn't receive their mounts back for far longer than a couple of months. I had a few bad or
  9. If the question is for me, no, nothing new. I remember that Dave agreed that the mount was performing poorly, he agreed that we should agree on a time frame until he can fix it and that was it. He didn't reply anymore. He told me before this that he doesn't really care about customers, he cares about the mounts. I somewhat doubt that too. I was pretty sure that the original worm was a crooked one. The reason I send the mount for tuning was that I understood that he can rectify the worm with a higher precision. Watching the video, I now even higher doubt that I bought 2 worms
  10. Congratulations on your choice! I was wondering... are you buying it from TS or from somewhere else? TS seem to have it again in stock quite a long time from now.
  11. The stretched flying bat image has a strongly similar pattern as the master flat does. Are you sure you're not missing any steps in the calibration and stacking, and are the darks exactly matching their corresponding lights and flats (gain, temperature, exposure)? Also, try to avoid any optimization at the calibration phase.
  12. It is most probably due to the AR coating on the sensor. Depending on the angle you're looking at the sensor, you'll see the pattern visually too. It seems to affect the longer wavelengths worse than the shorter ones. But don't worry about it. Calibrate the flats with matching darks for flats and you'll be fine. I had no issues whatsoever.
×
×
  • 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.