Rodd

It is strange but I have beeter luck with bicolor broadband images than I do with bicolor naerowband images. In fact, what usually happens is my bicolor btraodband image ends up better than a full RGB version for some reason. After a coupleof decent nights, I decided to see what I would end up with using just red and green data for NGC 1977. The stars are not colored very well, and this is an HDR composition using 120 sec and 10 sec subs to restore clipped stellar cores, so I definitely want to collect blue data (and luminance), so the stars come out nicely colored. Also, I simply must replace the ASI 1600 with the 2600. The star microlensing artifacts are just not acceptabl TOA 130 with .99x flattener and ASI 1600. 139 120.sec and 90 10 sec red, and 100 120 sec and 90 10sec green, bin 2x2. About 8.5 hours.

A motor encoder blew. Plus bearings were rough and the PEC curve had been lost.

I'm back baby! My first new data in months. I got my Mach 1 back from TNR and it is much improved. It has a new PEC curve, new bearings, grease, etc. What a difference. My guide graph actually looks respectable for a change. Also, I finally got to try the new .99x fl;attener, which has a spot size of 1um to 30mm, which covers my sensor (it might be 20 mm, but then its 2um to 30--something like that). So far I am impressed (which translates to so far I can't complain)-though it doesnt do much to reduce the ASI 1600 star microlensing artifacts. I fixed what I could. I botched the framing for NGC 1333 big time. I am hoping it can still make a nice image in the end. NGC-1977: 94 120 sec red, Bin 2 NGC 1333: 144 120 sec red, Bin 2

Reprocess. Its all about the halo and avoiding boundary lines within the halo. GCs are clearer.

Thanks, Snoani

Thanks Wolfie

Thanks Cajun. My favorite as well. It always had been.

Thanks Graham!

My mount arrived on Sunday. I will set it up over the next week or so as work and weather permit. I think I will use the TOA and new flattener. Meanwhile, I decided to try a data set from Insight Observatory in Namibia. 10 hours LRGB taken with AG Optical 20" Dal Kirkum and FLI 16803 camera.. I was surprised that I needed to use DBE on data collected from such a pristine site. This is my first attempt. I have since twiddled and fumbled my way through a few dozen versions--I think I will stick with this one for now. The dust lane is too dark, and the background galaxies could be brighter. I'll have to start from scratch. Version 1 Version 2-I think more natural

You like HS?

I agree. Theye are too close to tell. I guess in my sky, on most nights, there is little advantage to using the C11. It will build signal faster, but any such benefit is tempered by a significantly resuced FOV. When Nebula season comes around, I struggle to find suitable framings with the C11.

Yeah. I didnt realize that 1.3 was the lilit for 4". That is better seeing than I get 99% of the time. 1.3 is pretty good resolution. Maybe the FSQ is the scope I should use and forget about long focal length work--at least in my back yard.

Wow--virtually a lost art. Film AP is amazing. How to know one is pointing at the target? Film development takes time--focusing on stars is understandable, but framing? A very different skill set. I like black and white images as well (Ha). I suppose one can look at LRGB images in black and white too. There is something about black and white images.

Thanks Alan, glad you like it

Thanks!

Ahh. It’s a bit over stretched and over saturated around the rim but in my sky I have to stretch pretty hard

Thanks Neil. No, those spikes are artifacts of the sensor and/processing. I don’t go crazy over stars. They are quite difficult to get right

Thanks Beulah. Not sure what HP 150998 is. Is that a catalogue reference?

I do these comparisons to try and decide upon what scope I want to use. I change scopes maybe once per year. Setting up is not one of my strong points

They have about the same integration time; about 5 hours or so.

Well. It breaks down pretty quickly because processing can’t really be the same unless you use precise settings in the tools. But it’s not linear, so a particular curve for one maynot have the same effect. In short, the processing was close, but not really the same. The sky probably is the dictator in the room.

Thanks so much Win.

This should give some pause when attempting to choose between a small scope and a large scope. One image is taken with C11Edge with .7x reducer, the other with FSQ 106 with .6x reducer. I linear fit the FSQ image to the C11image after registration, so we are looking at precisely the same thing. There is some difference between the outer regions , but those are mostly due to processing. The focus of the comparison is tghe detail in the pillares of creation, which sem pretty close to me. It doesnt make my life any easiere! C11Edge FSQ 106

Thanks Olly.

Indeed.