Jump to content

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.



  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Everything posted by Shibby

  1. Just thought I'd add that a RAW image from a DSLR is a RAW image, regardless of whether you set the mode to monochrome or not, the file will be exactly the same. So, if you are going to use this approach you would want to use all the subs for each 'layer'.
  2. Hard to beat the QHY5L-II mono for the money. The small pixel size is well suited to mini guide scopes.
  3. I agree with the advice you've had on what to go for, but would like to add that you should consider buying second-hand. Most of my kit is second-hand and was received in excellent condition (astronomers tend to look after their stuff) and you'll get a lot more for your money.
  4. Hi. As they tell a thousand words, I think it might be best if you could post an image for us to look at.
  5. Well done on having a good go and getting a result - it might be small but I bet it's the only image of it on SGL!
  6. Fantastic image! I think you've got the balance between the channels spot on, revealing plenty of structure and colour variation.
  7. Looks great - congrats on finishing, getting up and running. Nice - and it has its own bathroom!
  8. When you say you did't have enough inward travel, do you just mean the focus? (i.e. not the prism?) Because, you should be able to move the prism inwards, getting it as far in as possible without overlapping the sensor area. Unless you've already done that?
  9. I noticed this and recognised the name Congrats, and good job on the processing.
  10. Assuming you're imaging through the Esprit 120, you should definitely use an L or LP filter to block the IR or you'll get some star bloat.
  11. While I believe it is possible to get a motorised alt/az mount for a dobsonian, the fact remains that they're really designed for visual astronomy so I'd question whether it's worth spending money down that road. For DSOs, the equatorial platform is really the only way to go.
  12. The difference is that lunar/planetary imaging only requires very short exposures (e.g. 30 fps) whereas DSOs are generally much, much fainter so longer exposures are required. As I said, you could try the brighter clusters and you may be able to pick up the brightest stars in them, but even these are fainter than the planets and the Moon.
  13. Do you have an Ha filter? There's a lot to be had in M82 and wouldn't be affected as much my good old Luna.
  14. The problem is, your frames (sub-exposures) would have to be so short that you wouldn't pick up any detail in the faint DSOs. Depending on your focal length, they might need to be a fraction of a second to avoid any trailing within the exposure. Perhaps you could still pick up some of the bright stars / clusters, so you could always give it a go. Planetary images are stacked from videos taken at (for example) 30fps so shouldn't be subject to any noticeable trailing.
  15. I have to say, it'd be very difficult - drift will start showing in a matter of seconds. Have you considered lunar and planetary imaging? There's plenty of fun to be had there with a dobsonian. It's also quite well suited to your camera and its high frame rate. There are plenty of guides on this forum and across the web on how to get started with lunar/planetary.
  16. Smooth and detailed. Very nicely done!
  17. I suppose a better RMS doesn't necessarily mean better FWHM. If you're guiding on a decent length exposure, the seeing will be averaged out giving you a decent centroid position for the star, while affecting the FWHM of the captured star.
  18. I dunno, it looks more like field rotation to me. There's a chance that the guide star was a long way from your target; this can cause some field rotation. Most likely, though, is an error in polar alignment. This causes your field to rotate around the guide star. Edit: The bright, central stars do show a different issue. The diffraction spikes don't look right, which could suggest a problem with the alignment of your spider vanes.
  19. A good start. No reason why you couldn't add in a separate layer for the core, as you mentioned. But I would also get more of the 10min subs, as there is more to be had. The running man is, I think, mostly reflection nebula?
  20. I like this a lot; plenty of galaxies nicely captured and processed without too much aggression.
  21. Very nice. Stars / clusters seem to mostly cope OK with the moon about. Did you re-take flats? I notice some dust patches showing up on the LHS.
  22. Thanks very much all! I think I'll resist posting a closer crop until I'm happier with the colour data (i.e. have gathered more).
  23. Thank you - I will try. It's certainly easier to set up and (perhaps more importantly) pack up when tired! I'm not put off by a patchy forecast any more Thank you. I have noticed that, although very spectacular, sometimes the shape of the galaxy can become a little lost in it all. I will try for them in the future though! Much appreciated - thank you!
  24. I can't quite believe this but, having checked, the last image I posted was in 2014!! Anyway, I spent most of 2017 building my observatory (thread here) having moved house, so finally I have been able to start using it. This is also my first LRGB image, so combining that inexperience with at least 3 years of cobwebs made this a bit of a struggle to process. I haven't done anything special - just curves and a star mask in Photoshop. Any C&C welcome. No tidal streams here - I thought about trying to go a bit deeper, but decided to hold back on the ambition since it's been a while Maybe I'll return to it later in the season once the moon has gone away. It could also do with some more RGB data. M63 L: 27x600s RGB: 3x600s each Atik 460ex MN190 Thanks for looking!
  25. Wow, very impressive image. You've done very well to capture so much data and bring out what I'm sure is a very faint target! I think, as mentioned before, the NR is a bit strong but I can understand why you've felt the need. I think if you can apply it primarily to the really faint bits so it doesn't affect the stars and brighter parts of the nebula that might help. Either way, your dedication (50 hours odd??) has certainly paid off.
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.