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.

sgl_imaging_challenge_banner_30_second_exp_2.thumb.jpg.7719b6f2fbecda044d407d8aba503777.jpg

Shibby

Members
  • Content Count

    3,435
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    2

Everything posted by Shibby

  1. Saw this on twitter first, came here to comment! The IFN looks superb, very nicely captured with all that dedication! I think if I added up my last 2 years of imaging, it wouldn't total 64 hours!
  2. Although I no longer use it for astrophotography, I still use my modified DSLR for daytime photography. As Tim says, the colour balance is the main issue, so I have a "grey card" that I take everywhere with me for setting the custom white balance.
  3. I believe that almost all the large NEAs have been discovered. All those over a certain size (I think it was something like 140m diameter?).
  4. What about the iOS wallpaper of Andromeda... ? I assume Apple decided M110 was not pretty enough, so replaced it with a big blue glow.
  5. Wow thanks folks! Just replied to your PM, DP Thanks anyways Carole, perhaps someone else will see this in the future and PM you!
  6. Sorry, yes it's the SynScan kit installed on the mount. But I don't have a hand controller so it's the SynTrek controller I was looking for anticipating it'd be cheaper.
  7. I like this a lot. So much interesting structure and very well captured!
  8. Brilliant. Some really sharp detail - what's the focal length (is it reduced?)
  9. Fantastic job; you've brought out so much of the background detail, but without overdoing it. Nice framing, too
  10. My old mount is an (old-style) Vixen GP with SynTrek, which I used to control via an EQMOD interface. I'm planning to use this as a portable widefield setup, but does anybody know where I can get hold of a hand controller? I don't need GOTO, just the ability to start/stop tracking.
  11. I think it's because of our unnatural environment. We spend a lot of time indoors, unlike our ancestors, so are confused by artificial lights (and curtains blocking out sunlight). I'm sure if we lived outdoors it'd be different... ...if it wasn't for light pollution. Everything is the fault of light pollution!!
  12. Congratulations Sara! SwagAstro Observatory looks fantastic, I bet you're dying to get started. I see you've taken up radio astronomy, too
  13. Good to see your obsy is coming along very nicely! It looks incredibly sturdy and is a nice design. I was just about to comment and recommend OSB instead of saggy ply for the roof but I see you've already decided that You asked about the power... As you say, the laws are somewhat grey and it's really insurance/moving house that's the main concern (as well as your own safety of course). I haven't yet buried my armoured cable, but that's mostly down to laziness. I've been planning to bury below spade depth and place yellow warning tape above it. I assume you'll be using a consumer unit? I have a small 2 circuit (lighting/sockets) unit and a bench supply for my DC circuit, with each device fused separately. To circumvent any future problems, I've actually powered the whole obsy from a 13A socket in the house. 13A is plenty, means I didn't have to add a new circuit and if I ever move I can just unplug the whole thing and then not worry about it.
  14. Security? A site that already has CCTV/security at night would be a bonus.
  15. I like the tool. FYI, I have a ratio of 1:5.1 and have no problems guiding.
  16. That's great, you've captured some impressively sharp detail!
  17. Super detail and nice processing with natural looking colours - I like it a lot!
  18. That's brilliant. The pillars look great even at 100% You already don't seem to have too much noise so it's difficult to say if more data will make much difference. I think both version have their merits. Perhaps somewhere between the two in terms of contrast would be good, but that's all down to personal preference. And I'm sorry; I know it's not necessary to, and everyone else has avoided correcting you, but I couldn't keep reading it: it's Hubble Sorry!
  19. Brilliant image! Very good detail and natural-looking processing which very pleasing on the eye.
  20. I've learnt to label the images as I capture them. I find it very difficult to tell otherwise. Sorry that's not more helpful, but I'd also like to know if there's any methods out there!?
  21. I've done this a few different ways. If you can find some distant streetlights, the AF can handle it. Otherwise, I just use trial-and-error with several exposures (live view is no good, as you say).
  22. Just a thought but, although it's not the biggest of sensors, you could use your OSC for a bit of widefield with a camera lens. Why waste the photons if you can have it capturing at the same time?
  23. Lots of good advice here already. You can get good results with a DSLR but it does require a LOT of data and dithering, as you're well aware of. Ultimately, the DSLR has limiting noise levels, though, and OSC can't reproduce the smooth detail you can get from cooled, mono sensors. You seem to have got your optics and guiding working well, so if you were to upgrade your hardware then the camera is probably the logical next step. I wouldn't suggest investing just yet, though, as there is more to get out of your current setup and I've always been a proponent of maximising your results with existing kit before upgrading. 2.5 hours is an awfully long time to be wasting with the UK skies... It used to take me about an hour until I built my own "observatory" and now the longest part of my whole setup is waiting for the old laptop to boot up!
  24. Oh wow, really?? Thanks very much So many amazing galaxy images looking through the entries! Congrats @alan4908 and @coatesg ! Not many of these people are from the UK I assume
  25. Very nice indeed! I suppose it's named for its appearance as a pair of eyes? Yet it's that tidal stream (you've captured so well) that really looks like an eye!
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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