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.

Welcome to Stargazers Lounge

Register now to gain access to all of our features. Once registered and logged in, you will be able to contribute to this site by submitting your own content or replying to existing content. You'll be able to customise your profile, receive reputation points as a reward for submitting content, while also communicating with other members via your own private inbox, plus much more! This message will be removed once you have signed in.


Advanced Members
  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

577 Excellent

1 Follower

About alan4908

  • Rank
    Star Forming
  • Birthday

Contact Methods

  • Yahoo

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Interests
    Astrophotography ! the moment I'm concentrating on deep space imaging
  • Location
    East Sussex

Recent Profile Visitors

2,059 profile views
  1. Great image Herra, I do like that field of view ! On the airport subject, although I'm fortunate to have relatively dark skies, planes are probably my major source of artificial light pollution. However, they don't really cause an issue for imaging since the resultant pixels lines easily get rejected without a trace with my stacking software. Alan
  2. Thanks for the comment Olly. In terms of the addition, yes - I was actually thinking of adding some OIII data at some point since I think it would improve the overall effect. My only issue at the moment is the UK weather ! Alan
  3. Thanks Paddy !
  4. Thanks for all your comments. It was quite an interesting object to process since the nebula is very faint in Lum but you have a very bright star next to it. Alan
  5. Jellyfish

    From the album Deep Sky II

    This is an LRGB image with Ha blended in the Lum and Red channels. The Lum was quite faint, even after over 3hours, so I decided to blend quite a large amount of Ha in order make the image reasonably bright and not too red. The Ha is also blended into the Red channel but at a much lower level. I made a slight change to the Hue, towards the green, in order to get a slightly more appealing red. In total, the image represents about 13 hours integration time.
  6. Thanks Paddy.
  7. Thanks Dave - yes, the combination of poor weather and a restricted horizon does make it frustrating ! Alan
  8. Thanks Olly - I think the reprocess was worth it !
  9. First a slight aside: I quite like trees but they can be a bit frustrating when you have a target object (eg IC443) that is visible for a couple of hours, disappears behind trees for a couple of hours, reappears for a couple of hours and then finally disappears. To overcome this I've programmed ACP with my highly undulating horizon so my scope acquires other objects when others are hidden - the joy of automated imaging... Anyway, back to the image which represents about 13 hours of integration time - I decided to go for a LRGB image with an Ha blend in both the Lum and Red channels. I was surprised that even with a relatively long exposure on the Lum it didn't pick up more of the nebula, so I decided to blend a higher than my normal Ha percentage into the Lum so that it would appear reasonable bright and not too red. Alan LIGHTS: 20; R:10; G:10; B:19 x 600s; Ha:7 x 1800s. DARKS:30; BIAS:100; FLATS:40.
  10. Thanks - yes, it was taken with my SW 80ED - an excellent scope for the money ! Alan
  11. Thanks Adriano. I expected some additional galaxies to appear in the field of view but not as many as I managed to capture !
  12. Sunflower (reprocessed)

    From the album Deep Sky II

    A reprocess of my previous attempt which is also in this gallery. The major difference is that I attempted to correct the starfield which was distorted due to optical issues. I also applied the Pixinsight function HDRMT to get a slightly sharper result for the main galaxy. The net effect is that these changes allow me to present the image in a much wider field of view.
  13. Thanks for the comment Laudropb. On the detail front, I attempted to slightly enhance this over my previous attempt by using the Pixinsight function HDRMT. I've found gives excellent results.
  14. Thanks John. Yes, I think I now prefer it to my closely cropped version. Thanks Chris. Thanks Pete. On the slightly green background: I checked the background on my monitor again and it looks OK. I then decided to measure it with the PS sampling tool set on 11 x 11 pixel average - I get a consistent 21/21/21 for the R/G/B values across the background which indicates everything is neutral. Anyway, thanks for the comment. Alan
  15. While I wait for another clear night, I thought I'd attempt to improve my processing skills with another go at an LRGB +Ha M63 image which I acquired in 2016. The main difference is that I've now corrected the starfield for optical defects, allowing me to present it in a much wider field of view. My original attempt is in my gallery Deep Sky II. What I hadn't appreciated was the vast number of galaxies that I'd also captured, some of which I got Pixinsight to identify below. Alan