cjdawson

Here http://sglsp.com/location/

I've booked too. Looking forward to it already.

Bascially, yes you add the colour. Think of it like this. Get three torches. In front of one, stick a red filter. In front of the next, sick a Green filter. And in front of the last stick a Blue filter. If you turn all three torches on and focus them on the same spot, it will show white light. you can change the colour, but turning off different lights. To increase the number of colours you can make, play with the brightness of each torch. When you take photos using a mono camera, by placing filters in front, you are doing exactly the same thing. So when you combine the images together in photoshop or other programs (I'd be surprised if PixInsight can't do it but would need someone with the software to know for sure) you are adding the false colour to recreate what was captured.

Hehe. Now you are hooked. welcome to SGL and the wonderful night sky.

Something wonderful to look at... try this. tonight look to the south, about 40 degrees up you'll see three stars in a row (the belt of Orion). Below you will see two bright stars (one of them is called Rigel, the other Saiph). Between this bright stars you should see three dim "stars" in a vertical line (ish). These will be a bit dimmer, when you look you'll have trouble focusing your eyes on them. Now get you telescope and point it at the middle of those three stars. You'll know when you hit the target that I've described, I can guarantee that you will love that one. Enjoy your evening.

Might be worth you contacting making contact with the QCUIAG group http://www.qcuiag.org.uk/ They used to have a group on Yahoo. And it wouldn't surprise me if someone there would know how to do the intervention that you are talking about. In addition, if you are lucky, you might be able to flash the firmware of the camera as I get the feeling that the features you are talking about are software features rather than hardware. might even be a driver thing!

All that I'm saying here is to manage your expectations as to what to expect from a real time view from a camera. If you throw enough money at the problem, I'm sure you can get a great image in real time. However most budgets, means that you'll be extended your exposure time. That's all.

The root issue here is that objects in the night sky are dim. Most cameras are designed to work in daylight, so the exposure times that work are are a fraction of what is needed to be able to clearly see night objects. You can get cameras that are very sensitive compared to about 20 years ago. However if you take a look at the threads of people capturing images, you will quickly see that the exposure times they are talking about for a single frame is around 2-10 minutes depending on settings. Then you'll also notice that the same people are talking about that single image being part of a set of 20-100 images. This can mean that for a single photo, there will be something in the region of 60 mins or more exposure time on the object. This simple won't happen in real time. that said, if you are only looking to see feint fuzzy blobs, it can be done with exposures of 10 seconds or less.

Vote out the local government?

Cheap at double the price.

I'm a little late to this party, but have some useful information. The scope that I'm working with is a Meade LX-90. Dew. 1. Above freezing, dew will form on the scope as water, it'll be misty, then droplets will form is allowed. 2. Below freezing, Frost will form, if left this will become a layer of ice. If you want to experiment and see the effects, just look at car windscreens. This is exactly the same thing that happens. How to clear it. There are bascially 3 ways. 1. Hair dryer - I'm not kidding, use warm air to gently evaporate the moister. pro's Can get rid of dew once formed. con's Mains hairdryer = 240v in a outdoors! Heat could damage the optics. 12v hair dryer = pulls lots of power, lower temperature, so less chance of heat damage. Will leave hotspots all over your optics, so they'll need to cool again to get a stable image. (not good for photography) 2. Dew shield Pro's No power required Con's cannot sort out dew if already formed on the optics. They slow the onset of dew forming, but a long time. This alone can be enough for some observing sessions. 3. Dew heater. Pro's actively heats the options, or the air in front to prevent the heat radiating away con's needs a power supply I made my own dew heater several years ago, here's version 1 http://astronomy.cjdawson.com/projects/DewHeater.html and here's version 2 http://astronomy.cjdawson.com/projects/PowerBox.html#NewHeatingElement When I first made my heater, I did the maths needed and found that "at full power" the heating element could draw 2.67amps at 12v. Whilst this sounds like alot of power, this happens when the heater is running at 100% power output. This is actually enough to clear frost from the optics. That's alot of power available. In reality I have found that I run the heater between 10% and 20%, This works out that at 20% power 0.534 Amps will be drawn, or 534mA. No one has said that you have to only have one of these options. There's no problem with having all three options available to you - this is what I do. Bascially I put a dew shield on my scope for normal use. Then have the heater, running at 10% to keep the dew away, and finally, can keep a 12v hair dryer in my kit for that one time when the heater is set too low, and didn't prevent the due.