alacant

+1 Lose the numbers and just do it. Cheers

Unique to StarTools, and due to your data being held in a db, you can apply it anytime you like. Gone are the days of having to apply deconvolution to linear data. As indeed is the need to get your initial stretch just right. https://www.startools.org/modules/sv-decon Here's an example we took from our recent m81. Note in particular the detail emerging in the galaxy: Yes. No. You could try Entropy with Ha or Compose. The latter works well if you have some frames taken with the red channel split from say, a UHC. https://www.startools.org/modules/narrowband-accents/usage --- --- --- TBH, the best only way to get to grips with all this is to try it. Keep your data and go back to it as and when you have more experience. For other POVs and use cases, don't forget the st forum. Cheers and HTH.

Hi Much better. Have a look at the ROI I posted here. Notice how it includes: the galaxy core an over exposed star background I used HDR with shadows at 50%, context 17px and SVDecon in sampling mode. That will bring out the detail right to the core and ensure you lose none of the data. The stars are rather big so you may need to use Shrink. This will also avoid punching holes around the stars. HTH

Dovetail, 1° springs, mirror clips, sealant, top rail... Those are the main ones. From what we can see, you may want to replace the metal finder retaining screws with all nylon varieties, especially if they are the glued nylon tipped ones. Unless you have any obvious reflections, we didn't find blackening the tube made any difference. Otherwise, it looks like the basis for a good solid setup. HTH

Hi Preparation So that any collimation holds, you may want to fit a long Losmandy dovetail to set the rings further apart, a rigid top rail to tie them, up-rate and augment the number of mirror springs and seal the primary to the cell to prevent lateral movement. Collimation We'd recommend losing the concentre and go instead with just the Cheshire and collimation cap. Don't stress over the secondary; apart from reflection it has no optical properties. Get it somewhere close and leave it. It's always a good idea to revise the common collimation myths and then put it all together using seronik's plain English guide. Cheers and good luck.

Hi everyone I think it fair to say that you'll produce the best results using the app with which you're most familiar. Take the trouble to learn the idiosyncrasies of each and you'll be able to produce consistent results which are to YOUR satisfaction. Do we really want a thousand Andromeda galaxies all looking exactly the same? Sometimes it seems, we do! We chose StarTools because it got us away from the endless mess of windows and collections of unrelated stretch-and-hope-for-the-best algorithms approach of other software. It is different. It works for US. If however the latter is what YOU find the best approach, then of course, stick with it; familiarity again. Those moving to StarTools from such apps are most likely going to find it more difficult to adapt. There are however migration guides. This one for example is aimed at Pixinsight users. Stick to what you find best. If you're just beginning, try a few. It really doesn't matter which one you finally settle upon. They'll all get you there. Just our €0,02 Cheers

You'd perhaps get more specific answers on the StarTools forum. Cheers

The StarTools site lists recommended settings for dss. I can find no promotion for the app on the site. Windows users tell me it's quite dated. There are alternatives;)

Don't know that app, but I'd recommend using flat frames as a very minimum. I'd guess maybe the 533 doesn't need dark frames (?) as you don't specify those either. Have a look at Siril which defaults to 32 bit and has a far more comprehensive set of calibration and stacking options. Cheers

Hi If in doubt, Reset and try the Legacy preset at high saturation: HTH Comparison:

Any irregularity? Best remove both it and the mirror clips.

Hi Guessing sw pds... Is it on all the individual frames? Are the mirror clips still in place? Are the tube, focuser internals, secondary mirror edges and spider blackened? Visually looking down the tube with a torch, anything reflective/dirty? As it's to one edge, my first guess is focuser intrusion.

StarTools 1.8.527mr2 Nice detail but still quite a bit of noise considering there's 19 hours. Are you dithering between frames and stacking with a clipping algorithm? If you want the Ha regions, stick the red in NBAccent.

For the second AutoDev, you are selecting neither a region of interest nor setting the gamma, fine detail or shadows, after which the stars and background will be taken care of. HTH

Please read the caption. The StarTools image is the other one. Presumably you don't like that either. Let's see if @jager945can help us.

This is designed for a look and feel of an old image from the film days. Try AutoDev instead of Film. Mmm. So in fact, any colour one chooses.

Which 'colour balance' feature'?

Hi everyone Steady enough last night to get some smaller stuff. StarTools' SVDecon did a nice job on the centre. Thanks for looking. 700d on gso203 ~3 hours ISO800 siril 1.1.0 StarTools 1.8.527-2

Hi If you like, post a link to the file. Then we may be able to advise better. StarTools allows you to go as heavy or as light as you wish. My guess is that you used Film Dev. Cheers

Very nice. One small tip. Maybe ease off the black? You may have lost some of the fainter fuzzy stuff. I'd put good money on there being a lot more to see. +1. You need 55mm sensor to shoulder of ff. Cheers

Every bit helps. Yes, of course.

If you had an eq6 it would be good. Remember though that with all low end reflectors, there is still quite a bit of work to do to get them to astrograph standard. The difficulties with adjusting and retaining collimation are a result of not addressing the necessary upgrades; one collimates an f4 in EXACTLY the same way as an f5. The upgrades are outlined here. Apart from the dovetail plate, none are particularly expensive, but you will need time to pull the thing apart to replace the defective parts. Even though it's still far from ideal, if you want to stay at 6" and comfortable on your mount, the TS UNC is the nearest sensibly designed f4 we've seen, but even then, the enormous secondary is blocking so much light that you may as well stay with your 130. Cheers and HTH

Hi Be careful. The bottom of the range TS is a nightmare. Cheers **edit: for those not following the link, that's because of its design. Not because it's f4.

+1 And lots of other stuff besides. Far better without. In fact we've not yet found a target where the l-enhance does anything much different to a modest UHC. Certainly a disadvantage in this case. @OP, in dark skies, we'd recommend always trying without first. Go to filters as a last resort perhaps? Not very good examples, but you'll get the idea. Cheers and HTH

TBH, it was just this target. I'm sure that this won't work for everything. I just wanted to get away from the AI thing which seems to be flying off the shelves these days. A 2x2 bin took care of most of the rubbish whilst instead of my usual heavy handed second AutoDev (StarTools), was careful to develop until the background just began to get out of hand. Then eased off a bit. But hey, I was lucky this time. I'll be over in the corner with you very soon now.