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.

  • Announcements



Advanced Members
  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

1,032 Excellent

1 Follower

About Filroden

  • Rank
    Sub Dwarf
  • Birthday August 26

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location
    East Cleveland

Recent Profile Visitors

1,378 profile views
  1. You can apply almost all processing techniques to a just shouldn't! Jpgs are 8 bit and compressed so they destroy data which means tools like curves can have terrible results, making them look very 'stepped'. You're always better working in at least 16 bits and uncompressed (e.g. TIFF or FITS) so you can work over a better range and not have the steps seen in a jpg. PixInisght comes with a long free trial but it requires it. I needed lots of tutorials and ultimately a guide book to really start to use it well. You can achieve the same results in Photoshop if you know how. I can do a little in Photoshop, such as level and curve adjustments, but I find the tools in PixInsight more in tune with the way I think. As I said above, I only applied some crude adjustements to see what was under the colour cast. You will be able to achieve far more using the original data and taking a little more time than I did
  2. Really nice first attempt. There's a lot of data hidden behind that blue cast. I don't know how to fix it in Photoshop but a quick pass through PixInsight's ColourCalibration and some crude curve adjustments shows you this. I've broken the stars (they are all showing orange) but there is a lot of colour in the nebula that you could bring out.
  3. I personally would never take the risk. It's expensive equipment and it would be totally uninsured. I do retire indoors to watch some TV while I image and have a second computer indoors connected via TeamViewer so I can monitor what is going on. I usually pack up after a few hours.
  4. Further price drop
  5. Same. I set up tonight with the intention of getting 3 hours of Ha. I failed to switch on DST so my first StarSense align failed. When I did get aligned and switched on the camera it showed a massive smear somewhere. So I stripped it down and cleaned it. Realigned and now the sensor was covered in dust. I would still have to do two more aligns and it was getting so late I was concerned about waking the neighbours so I've just packed up. I think I'm going to have to wait until August.
  6. I love the framing. You get just a little more field of view with the DSLR which matches this perfectly. As Tim says...very vibrant.
  7. Here's an article on high ISO noise reduction. I suspect you will achieve better results with it off and using your noise reduction techniques of choice.
  8. Competition details: Forum to post images:
  9. I liked the first version but this is amazing! And only 16 minutes? We're your subs 30s or less? If so I'd put that into the competition.
  10. That's a nice result. Lovely star colours and you're just picking up the reds in the outer parts of the nebula. Do you take new flats after every session. Whilst you can re-use flats if you're certain camera and scope remain oriented, this usually applies if you're using a fixed set-up. If you're tearing down the equipment each session i would recommend trying with fresh flats. You're showing some trailing. What exposure length are you using? You may be able to take shorter exposures and integrate more of them to get the same total integration time. This might help reduce trailing and loss of exposures. I would never use an exposure that gave less than 80% results. We have far too few clear nights to be throwing away subs!
  11. Now you're using an EQ mount and have PHD working I would recommend trialling SGPro. It will platesolve out of the box allowing you to precisely centre on a frame taken on a previous night. It will also work if you move to a mono camera with filter wheel. It also will manage focusing if you ever decide to automate. Its interface and terminology can take a while to figure out but there is logic in its apparent madness! It's definitely made imaging easier. I fire up SGPro, connect camera, filter wheel, focused and mount. Fire up PHD and connect guide camera. Then I'm ready to start. i previously used BackyardEOS which was easier to use but is Canon specific. The only free capture software I've used were Sharpcap and Firecapture but these were more designed for short exposures. PixInsight is starting to implement image capture but I don't think it will ever catch up with dedicated capture software.
  12. That gives me hope!
  13. I've looked at it but the wider nebula goes well beyond my fov. I could look at just the trunk though. Good call.
  14. Looking at it, it seems the best targets for me might be around Cygnus, Cepheus and Cassiopeia. Do you think the Bubble will be strong enough in Ha to overcome the lighter sky? If not, then my camera/scope frames the North America Nebula/Pelican quite nicely. The Veil might be too low still. Thankfully, they are almost all circumpolar for me, so I can gather RGB once I get true darkness back in August. I didn't think that the Oiii filters were quite as moon proof as Ha filters, even at 3nm? It's next on my shopping list, along with an 8 filter wheel, but might have to wait until autumn.
  15. Light pollution tends to peak at certain wavelengths whereas sunlight/moonlight is bright across the spectrum.