Jump to content

SkySurveyBanner.jpg.21855908fce40597655603b6c9af720d.jpg

Rodd

Members
  • Posts

    7,637
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    29

Rodd last won the day on October 4 2023

Rodd had the most liked content!

Reputation

9,762 Excellent

1 Follower

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Interests
    Astrophotography, music, the wilderness
  • Location
    CT

Contact Methods

  • Yahoo
    rodddryfoos@yahoo.com

Recent Profile Visitors

7,631 profile views
  1. Rodd

    NGC 3628

    Thanks Bryan....I am fine, ust get frustrated at times. I have come to teh conclusion that 99% of the frustration comes from the conditions, whether it be haze, high cloud, jet stream, smoke, LP, wind, humidity, the Moon, you name it, it's there most of the time. The images that give me the biggest headaches are the ones taken during poor conditions. I am starting to come to terms with this being a part time hobby. I think from now on I have to accept that I will need, on average, two Moon cycles to finish an image. Two nights with each filter. Thats 10 imaging sessions for an HaLRGB galaxy. If I want to use only subs taken during good seeing, I will need to kake it 3-4 Moon cycles. Man, if I am not careful, I will start to lose interest!
  2. I decided to crop it like I did originally. The idea is to provide some size still less than that of full resolution, so the viewer doesnt have to "work" as hard.
  3. Thabnks-glad you like it
  4. Thanks - yeah, I agree. But man, what a harrowing road
  5. Stilll at it. here is a Bin 1 version of this data. I think itrs the best version so far and worthy of posting. there is such a fine line between good and evil, dark and light, victory and defeat, a sound that you can barely hear in the quietest of rooms and one that you cannot, a cumpulsion and a whim. The devil is always in the details, as is his sibling. The big question is why does it take me 100 tries before I manage to process something tolerable? Its as if I am painting by numbers with a house painting brush. Too critical, some say. Perhaps. But I've learned it is very hard to teach oneself to like broccoli (I don't mind it.....too much). TOA 130 asi1600 16.5 hours P.S. There is not much difference between this version and the B in2 version until you view at full resolution, which is the whole point. So go ahead and click.
  6. The 190 is an epic scope. It always amazes
  7. Rodd

    NGC 3628

    All. I rely on this forum for advise and critique. I obviously processed the above data on no sleep and blurry eyes. It is atrocious. So much so I deleted it from AstroBin and Telescopius. I can’t believe I posted such drivel. Please, don’t hesitate to tell me the image sucks when it does. I made one bad decision after another. Here is a much better representation. I got some sleep and binned the data. I might reduce the brightness a bit and lift the background but at least it’s passable, unlike its predecessor.
  8. Rodd

    NGC 3628

    Thanks Bryan. See note below
  9. Rodd

    NGC 3628

    Here is a reprocessed version. I had a sleep and had at it again.
  10. I was fianlly able to adda decent luminance to this image. What a difference it makes. I was fortunate that seeing during the luminance shoot was the best seeing among all the channels. The tail is still lacking due to my sky, but I don't think I can do much about that with the TOA 130. I might be able to capture it with a lot of hours using the FSQ 106. I will ponder that possibility for the future. Not likely to change scopes just for that, and galaxy season is not optimal FSQ time. Maybe if my sky would permit nice star fields and galaxy clusters, but they aren''t very satisfying with their shortcomings. Anyway, I am pleased with this image. While it may not be the most revealing of the tain and the surrounding fain t galaxies and clusters, I believe it to be a decent representation. It makes me want to bring out the C11! TOA 130 with .99x flattener and ASI 1600. About 16 hours of data. 120 sec and 10 sec RGB subs, and 60 sec Lum subs.
  11. I managed to pull out more of the outer arms and glow
  12. Thanks, GT. The Canaries, if only!
  13. I use scnr about every image. Mostly for green removal. For broadband images, I try not to manipulate the palette much. I will occasionally bump it up if color is almost lacking, and for stars. I think most color problems gif me are dud to my sky.
  14. Thanks, Jim. I tend to agree. I was befuddled when PIs photometric color calibration tool resulted in the hyper blue version. The manual CC tool rendered the less blue. That’s a huge difference. Ad far as the image goes, I am ok with the core and disc. If seeing had been good, I suppose it would be pretty decent. The problem I have is the outer arms. 32 hours is on the long side, and the arms are barely visible and it took me about 50 tries to accomplish it. That means my sky just does not support what I want to do. It’s sad, but I am questioning whether I wish to continue; at least not from CT. I am working on a move to Australia. Maybe then I will find what I seek. For the record, I have finally processed this image to my satisfaction. Here is the final version: a bit better. I think I have squeezed all I can out of the data
×
×
  • 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.