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. Maxim eh, I see there is a 30 day trial, I might have to try it. Helen there isn't a brightness setting in DSS is there?
  2. Hi. I'm attempting to stack some images but, being mere 30s exposures, DSS can't find enough stars to align the images. It's a narrow view of the flame nebula region, where there doesn't seem to be many bright stars. I probably haven't got much but I just wanted to stack them to see if anything is visible at all. I've already tried the minimum detection threshold and even without median filter, but no joy. It's detecting around 7-13 stars for each image. Any ideas? Can I align the images manually or with some other software?
  3. Wow, sounds like you've worked very hard for this image - and it's certainly paid off, it's amazing!
  4. astrokat: Yeh, not enough inward travel Wish I'd known before buying the scope really. Prime focus might be possible with a webcam though. Deneb: Please do, I'm very unexperienced at processing. I'll supply the DSS output if you like? toilandtrouble: I'd be honoured! I look forward to your moon images, I've tried a couple myself but no great results - I haven't had a go with this registax thing yet...
  5. That's great to know! It is the other people on this forum that have inspired me to try imaging so it's nice (and quite surprising) to know that I'm now one of them. Have you tried any imaging yet at all? Unfortunately, this seems to be the only way I can achieve focus Oh, I did try it through an eyepiece once but the results were awful!
  6. I think the first is my favourite too, it is smoother than the others and the core looks better, although I've found on my desktop monitor it's harder to see the outer detail than the brighter laptop monitor. I need more subs! More! Oh yes, forgot to say - ISO 800. Interesting to hear you have the same camera, we should share experiences. This article may be of interest to you: Nikon D70 - astronomy imaging I must admit, I didn't bypass the median filtering this time!
  7. Maybe one image was taken several thousand years ago, giving us some parallax
  8. Thanks, I'm happy with the result given all the problems I'm having with tracking - thankfully DSS is very forgiving with the tracking errors, so long as the focus is ok. I hope to add more subs to it soon, but the weather isn't looking too promising again this week.
  9. Wow, that truly is stunning. I love the impression of depth, particularly in the B&W image.
  10. I've had another go at imaging M42 (see my first attempt here: http://stargazerslounge.com/imaging-deep-sky/93234-m42-managed-image.html ) This time, I've used more subs and a bhatinov mask made out of paper for focusing I can't decide which version I like best. It's a trade-off between the noise and the faint detail... 26x30s subs, 5 darks SW 130P, Nikon D70 (unmodified), 2x barlow, total full moon!
  11. Well... I haven't looked closely at those images, but comets are certainly quite common, they orbit the sun and often get close. Smaller comets only show tails when they get close to the sun. Take a look at some of the videos from SOHO. e.g... The Best Of SOHO Movies
  12. Hmm, does a 2" barlow collect more light onto the CCD than a 1.25"? I have to use a barlow to focus and get very dim images, so am just wondering if this would improve matters...?
  13. I have the same scope as you Ant, and I also have mixed results with tracking - more often than not the problem is down to the scope slipping or being nudged while focusing / taking images etc. Be very delicate! Interesting idea about the powertank on the shelf, I will have to try that. There is one thing you can do, after you've performed a GoTo and re-centered the intended object, if you hold down [ESC] for 2s then press [ENTER] this re-centers the system to help improve the accuracy. I think it's called Pointing Accuracy Enhancement or something like that. However, sometimes I seem to then have to perform another GoTo for the tracking to kick in again properly. Edit: There is new firmware, 3.07 with the following change: "Improve the initial setup of the system -- The telescope no longer needs to be level and pointed to the North as its initial position in order to accurately perform the star alignment procedure."
  14. I have the same scope as you, superjody, and I have the following setup: focuser : 1.25 eyepiece holder : barlow lens (removed from barlow) : T-adapter (just the nosepiece) : T mount ring : camera (Nikon DSLR). This allows me to achieve focus with the barlow close as possible to the camera, and therefore the widest field I can manage. I seem to be able to get up to 30s exposures like this. I'm a total beginner having only bought the scope in November, but here's an example of an image I took: http://stargazerslounge.com/imaging-deep-sky/93234-m42-managed-image.html I know it's not great but I'm (slowly) learning, so I hope my struggling experiences are of some help to you!
  15. I've recently started using a Bhatinov mask and find it a very handy focusing tool. Nice image though, better than my first attempt at the moon.
  16. If you select a planet and press space, stellarium will track it. you can then try increasing timescale and watch the moons orbit The clouds are driving me nuts too! every time a potential break is forecast it never happens!
  17. Thankyou for the advice, it will prove very useful (if those clouds ever part!) The tracking isn't perfect, in fact some of the frames that DSS stacked did have a bit of trailing - it seem like the stacking process deals with this. Can I take it that its always better to add more subs, even if they are of lower quality? Or is it best to manually select the best ones? Sorry for the persistent questions!
  18. Not any more by the looks of it Unless you live in Ireland... Edit: The met office are a bit more optimistic though!
  19. Thanks, I will try to take a load at 45s. I have to use a (very unresponsive) TV remote control to open and close the shutter, will it matter that the subs vary by a few seconds? How does it work with darks and flats, when imaging over different evenings? Do I combine darks from different evenings, or take them all at the end...? I don't quite get how it'd work.
  20. Hi, M81 is my second deep sky imaging target, I want to see how good I can get this image using what I think is a modest setup: 130P Alt-Az and friend's unmodified D70. I plan to add many many more subs when the clouds clear. It's currently 19 ISO800 subs stacked together, most 30s but managed to get 2 half-decent (maybe quarter-decent) 60s subs in there too. I didn't notice any "outer fuzziness" until I clipped the bottom of the red channel off, does this mean light pollution is getting in the way? I have ordered the £20 skywatcher LP filter and will see if that improves matters... Any tips & advice much appreciated! Will I get rid of the noise, and if so will more detail pop out? I took darks but should I be taking 'flats'?
  21. What lens do you have? Unless it's an EF-S, then this sort of filter shold work: Astronomik CLS Light Pollution EOS Clip FilterTelescope Accessories | Rother Valley Optics
  22. Looks like he's already tried ISO 800 for 10 secs and there is still a lot of LP showing.
  23. Definite light pollution there, how long are the subs? A filter would be a good purchase for you, I believe you can get ones that go in between the lens and mirror. (I'm assuming these aren't taken through a scope and therefore you dont have a 1.25 inch nosepiece.
  24. I will certainly try to take as many as possible, it'll be tough though as even with 30s subs I have to throw many of them away. I'd be interested to find out what/how to achieve this? Either way, there is still plenty to do and try with a minimal setup, we cannot expect to get great results but I am nevertheless finding it quite rewarding so far. I can still see more with imaging through the scope than I can with the eye, so it's not all pointless.
  • Create New...

Important Information

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