Whistlin Bob

Pretty sure it is Olly- all the data and other posts are from this year, I think it's just a typo in the initial post.

Here's my effort- brought to you by lots of cloudy nights when I'm not able to gather my own data! I've been on holiday and so had a bit of time to play around and thought I'd put together a video of my main steps- partly to invite feedback on how I processed it, and partly on the off-chance that it might give others ideas. The act of documenting it has been quite educational in itself- primarily in showing me that what in my head is a reasonably structured and methodical process is actually a bit chaotic and all over the place. Hey- ho- it's been fun. If you've got a few minutes this is the video: And here's my effort: I've attached a TIFF as well in case too much detail is lost in the JPEG. Final.tif

@SiD the Turtle - I'd say a very well done for a successful first light- that's not bad at all. My next steps on this would be to gather Ha data on your next clear night and then follow the tutorials at Light Vortex astronomy to learn how to blend it with your RGB data (I have no connection to them- it's just how I learned) - it'll make a huge difference on what is a popular, but quite faint target. Oiii and Sii are a bit trickier and need more time, but they will add a fair bit too and give you the opportunity to play with different palettes. To your specific points- - I think you have enough RGB data, its narrowband you need now. - The Ha will blend in as Red and transform the image. - I think possibly your backfocus is slightly short, but not by much. - Aren't those two stars either side? - I think that gradient might be Hydrogen nebulosity, but I'm not sure. In any case, flats won't remove a gradient unless it's a feature of the image train, most gradients are caused by light pollution. You could remove it using Dynamic Background Extraction, and Ha data will likely swamp it anyway.

Reading through this thread, it does make me scratch my head as to why truss dobs are not more popular here in the UK. I came across an Orion USA 14" dob second hand a few years ago which included padded bags for transport. It's nowhere near as compact (or beautiful) as the elegant scopes that @Stu has used, but it's very sturdy, if rather heavy. It regularly makes the trip to my local clubs observing site with room for my son and his mate in the back of the car. Picture shows the scope and an imaging rig in the back of the car (that was a bit cosy!)

Really good report. I was out in our back garden with friends last night, and the skies cleared around 11:30. I'd had a few too many shandies for an extended session, but showed them Jupiter, Saturn, the moon and Messier 13 in the 8 inch dob and they were very appreciative. It's such a pleasure to share these views with people. The biggest response was to the moon which was showing very well last night- it's so rewarding when people literally gasp with wonder at the view.

Having two dobs already, including a 14", I'm not in the market for one of these, but this feature alone makes me favourably disposed towards them. It's a pet niggle of mine that telescopes which are frequently bought by beginners include a straight through finder that requires you to master some advanced yoga positions at the same time as learning to star hop if you want to look at anything above about 70 degrees. I can't imagine the production cost difference is more than a few quid. I wonder how many people are put off by that experience? Well done FLO, I hope this encourages other manufacturers to match the spec.

I got a set of these in July, but some typical British summer weather has really limited any opportunities to use them. I have had one evening with them, and gathered some Ha on NGC7000 for comparison with my previous 7nm ZWO filters on an image I took back in June. Both images below are an hour of data from an ASI1600mm on an Explorer 200p at f4.5 First- here's the ZWO 7nm filter: ...and here's the new Baader 3.5nm: I've not quite lined them up the same, but I think there's plenty here to inform a comparison. So- smaller stars and more signal from faint nebulosity. Pretty happy with that.

Terrific report- it's a couple of months since my last really good session and this just makes me hunger for it.

Yep- been there! 😂

I was seduced by the very lengthy 130pds thread on this site and bought it as my first imaging scope, along with an asi224 and an HEQ5. I've never regretted this for a moment- the 130 performs very well. Don't be afraid of collimation: if you invest in a collimator of some sort, it's a pretty easy process- certainly not more difficult than many of the other things you need to learn for imaging. For the first 18 months I used it in 2 ways- either with the asi224 doing short exposure/high gain style unguided imaging. In these examples you can see the narrow field of view that @vlaivwas taking about: Or with a modified 600d and coma corrector, with the asi224 as a guider, giving a much wider field of view: Both of these were taken in my first year, so you can see it does perform in novice hands. I've now got an asi1600mm and the 130 handles that really nicely too! @vlaiv was also right in my view about using a different scope for planetary and lunar- I picked up a cheap 200p and use it with the asi224 and a 3.2x Barlow and that also performs well- although it's right on the limit for an HEQ5.

Nice image 😁. Not sure what capture software you're using, but you can usually set to dither every x exposures to get round this. I usually dither every 5 minutes and don't seem to suffer walking noise.

Another vote here for a grunt'n'go 8 inch dob. Not too heavy and just a few steps to the patio. Really is very convenient.

Yeah- going to have to weigh in and agree with everyone else. Really enjoy your observing reports, and I've benefited from your knowledge and advice to others on many occasions.

I must say, this aligns to my thoughts exactly. Once you get used to navigating the night sky a 10" dob is a terrific observing instrument, and unless you have really terrible light pollution using the RDF, RACI finder and SkySafari combination is pretty straightforward.

They don't know what they're missing...

Hi @John- yes, that, and also the trend to needing to have achieved something and 'improved', rather than just be.

Great thread! I enjoy both practices; they're almost like different hobbies in many ways but they need not be mutually exclusive. Definitely agree that SGL is not a great place to judge popularity. I still observe whenever I can, but only rarely get the chance to write it up. My posts on here probably suggest I'm mostly an imager, but it's really the opposite. It's just that images are easily shareable. I'm lucky to have a permanent setup so I can quickly set an imaging run going then get on with the business of enjoying the night sky. I've then got a data set that I can play with when the weather is being less friendly. They also stimulate me in different ways. Imaging is challenging and often hugely frustrating. To achieve good results I need to get on top of a sequence of different processes, often with lots of technical problem solving (which I don't particularly enjoy), and then using software in creative ways to reveal something of the universe (which I do really enjoy) which you can share with others (which I also enjoy). But I need to be in the right mood to do it. Observing, on the other hand, is only frustrating for me when the weather isn't playing. If it's a clear night, it can be the solution to a filthy mood or the silver lining to a bad day. The process of finding and then observing objects in the night sky I find deeply calming and a wonderful antidote to the daily drudge. And more than once, a bit of Dobsonian therapy has saved my imaging rig from an eBay listing when it's misbehaving! Reflecting on this, I think that imaging is far more aligned with the spirit of the age, and it would not surprise me if it became the more popular branch of our hobby, but I'll always be happy to keep at least one foot in the visual camp- minority or otherwise. Oops- I've gone on a bit!

Bought a set of Baader Ultra NB filters (Ha=3.5nm, Sii & Oiii=4nm) last week. Turns out the "Clear Skies Guaranteed" on the side of the box is accurate- filters delivered on Friday and clear skies ever since. @FLO- if only you'd told us good weather could be purchased... Gave them a run on Cygnus Wall last night, with 50 mins per channel at gain 250, 120s per sub. Imaging rig is an old blue tube 200p on an HEQ5, using an ASI1600mm camera. In comparison with the 7nm ZWO filters they've replaced first impressions are more nebula signal with smaller stars as you'd expect, and there were no gradients- even on the weaker O and S channels. Pretty pleased, now to try them on a brighter target to check out the haloes. Presentations here are SHO and HOO

In a positive way, I'm not sure last night was great for judging scopes. I've had my 14" dob for three years now, and the views I had of Jupiter last night were just phenomenal- they were easily the best I've seen in that time. Still got a grin on my face.

Yes it was urgent! Just waking up now after a really good night. From my notes: "Jupiter- amazing views. Bands and details in bands best ever. Moon casting Shadow. Just terrific."

Well done everyone- fantastic images by the winners 👍

Yes- that's the advice I've always followed and been pleased with the results. I've not really experimented though.

I use a 1600mm. Without dithering I get walking noise, so definitely turn it on. However, I take shorter subs with it (it has lower read noise then my canon), so I only dither every five subs.

Nice report Grant. I sympathize in the local light pollution. I spotted on your profile that you're in Burton- if you're interested we have a good club on your doorstep: https://www.roslistonastronomy.org.uk/ The forestry centre is only a Bortle 4, but I've seen m101 there a few times including with an 8" dob. There are also lots of experienced observers to share the experience with. We're just getting back into the normality of regular observing sessions- you'd be very welcome to join us.

I do sympathise- it's a lot of money in one go when we're used to software being free or subscription based. But if there was some physical gadget that improved images as much as PI does then it would be thought an absolute bargain. AP is a hobby, so it's always an indulgence, but for me it is good value for money.