Moonshed

I remember an event that was actually funny in that it was a stupid thing I did. We were on holiday on the Scottish east coast somewhere and the sky was a pretty good dark sky site. I decided to place my camera on the ground and take a one hour time exposure of the amazing sky. The camera had no timing mechanism (this was many years ago) so it was a case of retrieving it after an hour and closing the shutter. One hour later we returned to the spot only to realise we couldn’t remember exactly where we placed it, and with it being so pitch black it really didn’t matter anyway. We eventually gave up and found it next morning, covered in dew but otherwise in good condition, more than could be said for the pure white very overexposed photo! Not one of my best astrophotographs.

A sad reflection on modern times, however, we all have to live somewhere but with proper light pollution controls population expansion could be managed so much better.

SNAP!

One time when on holiday in Arizona my wife and I were driven out to a remote area in the Sonoran Desert so we could admire the incredible dark sky. Like you I was so overwhelmed by the sheer number of stars it took me a while to find my bearings. I have never seen so many naked eye stars before or since. An amazing experience!

I was keen to get a good image of Saturn but was unable to see it from my back garden. Moved all the gear piece by piece to the front garden. Set up the table and placed the laptop on it. Got my swivel typist chair. Ran the extension lead and plugged everything in. Did the polar alignment with PoleMaster. Focused on a star using a Bahtinov mask. All set to go. Switched on the laptop to run the FireCapture program only for it to begin installing the latest updates that I was unable to stop, all because I had forgotten to install them earlier in the day when I knew they were waiting. By the time that was finished Saturn was behind a neighbour’s house. Say no more.

Lucky you, it reminds me of Lawrence of Arabia. 😂

My mishap goes back 25 years. I lived near Glasgow where the light pollution was pretty bad. I had just started astrophotography and back then I was of course using a film camera (the younger ones here can Google what that is 😀) and I decided I wanted a photo of the Orion Nebula. It was a 30 minute drive to the nearest forest where the sky was the darkest for miles around. I set up my gear using the car headlights and then powered my kit using the car battery. Polar alignment was achieved by squinting through a very small lens after twiddling with the time and date rings, it took a good 30 mins. The film roll took 36 pictures and on the first night I used 12. I returned twice more over the next few days until I had used all the film. The problem was that until you got your developed photos back you had absolutely no idea how good the focus was, or the framing or the exposure. All you could see when taking the photo was through the tiny little viewer at the top of the camera. I could just about make out Orion’s Belt through it. You cannot imagine my pain when having gone to all that trouble, three times, that when I went to wind the film back I realised there wasn’t any film in the camera! This was in part due to the fact that even without a film the picture count would still increase every time you wound the film on, even without a film! A keen eye, in daylight mind, would notice the other dial was not moving. Such was the pain I still recall every detail, and pain, 25 years on 😉. More recently I’ve done everything else, to forgetting to remove the Bahtinov mask, forgetting to charge camera battery, forgetting to change from BST and not understanding why the GOTO was so far off, tripping over cables and knocking the mount after precise PA etc etc. Remind me, why did I go into this hobby😂

Thanks vlaiv, I’ve always wondered but never got around to really finding out. Now I know.

I can’t figure out what the green + number is for or the number underneath it next to the talk bubble thingy which I think is the number of posts made?

That’s what I had in mind, I should have made it clear. We know it’s impossible of course because of the 2nd law of thermodynamics but I’m sure some weird gadgets have come pretty close. The Beverly clock is a good example, I hadn’t come across that one before.

I wonder if anyone knows what has come the closest to being perpetual motion? (in the real world not theory).

All I know about the new RASA f2 scopes is that a lot of amazing images have been posted, and I do mean amazing! I’m aware that I am somewhat jealous of the images they produce, I can’t compete with my ancient 8” f10 ( improved to f5 with EasyGuider) Celestron but nonetheless I am proud of the very average images I have managed to produce with it. I can’t help thinking though that using a RASA makes it so easy that less skill is needed by the operator, maybe I’m wrong in which case I’ve no doubt I shall soon be corrected 😊. This is probably just me ‘cos I can’t afford one myself 😩

Or you can just say a big boy did it and he ran away.

Sound advice!

Hi KingsAmis, I asked the same question a couple of years ago because of the build up of dust and grime on my 35 year old 8” Celestron. I was surprised by the heated debate it started! Some members were adamant that the mirror should be left as it as while others said I should clean it. I took the view that I clean all my other optics so why not the main mirror? I cleaned it, very carefully, following a clip on YouTube showing how it should be done. The difference in the before and after was remarkable and I am so glad I cleaned it. You mirror most likely will not be anything like as bad as mine and you will probably get away with cleaning just the secondary mirror, if it needs it. Good luck either way and clear skies!

Thank you. If I do manage to get an image I will post it here no matter how bad it may be. I only have a short window of opportunity to capture the Horsehead, I get about an hour as it passes though a gap in next door’s trees.

Yes, I agree, I thought that was the point of listing your gear in your signature, but apparently this is not visible on phones for some reason. The posters location is shown under their Username. That leaves light pollution which is of course a very valid point. I live in a Bortle 4 area and have added that to my signature. Those that use phones only need to say so and any relevant details can be given. Thanks for the info on my camera and explaining about the filters. My Canon doesn’t seem too bad on picking up red but that is based on one example of M42, I posted that image a few posts back. As soon as weather permits I will have a go and see what I get and take it from there. Thanks for the info.

You had posted 7 times and each time I have responded and answered your questions but you do not appear to understand what I am explaining to you. Even on your last post you repeat that you cannot see my signature as you are using a phone. I know, you already told me! I posted a QUOTE from a PREVIOUS reply as it explained very clearly the setup I was using. I even said that’s how I explained it before. You do not seem to be able to grasp what I am saying. I really do not see the point in your deleting so much material from most of your previous posts after I said I would leave it there, I’m sure you must have your reasons but it does look a little childish. This exchange has got me nowhere which is why on my last post I said “I think I will leave it there. Thanks for trying to help.” I will say again, for the final time, thanks for trying to help, but I think we must be on different wavelengths. Sorry for having wasted so much of your time, I know you were trying to help.

Thanks for all the info. I knew that as my Canon had not been modified the built in filter reduces the infrared but was unaware that it also reduces much of the hydrogen-alpha emissions that surrounds the Horsehead and gives it contrast. What 2” filter (to fit my tele-extender) would you recommend for the Horsehead? I can’t fit any directly to my Canon without a lens on it, I think you can do that when they have been modded? Thanks again, I didn’t realise this was going to get complicated when I started the thread. Live and learn ! Soon as weather permits I will try it with my existing gear. I was unable for some reason to open your astrobin images or your Ha B&W image of the Horsehead.

“I have an 8” Celestron SCT (all as per my signature 🙂). I fix the tele-extender directly onto the visual back and my un-modded Canon EOS 1100D straight onto that. That’s it!” That’s how I explained it before and I fail to see how I can make it any clearer. I don’t have a picture and to be honest can’t be bothered to set up all my gear in the day time just so I can take a picture of it. I think I will leave it there. Thanks for trying to help.

My tele-extender is f6 with its 50mm lens with a focal length of 300mm. This gives a total magnification with the Celestron of x6.8 which is why I consider the size of the Horsehead will be very small in the image and not be able to withstand much enlargement. I have no idea how much contrast it will have with the red background.

I have an 8” Celestron SCT (all as per my signature 🙂). I fix the tele-extender directly onto the visual back and my un-modded Canon EOS 1100D straight onto that. That’s it! The only nebula image I have taken is M42 and this picture is how it came out, after a few trial and error attempts. I know it’s not brilliant but it shows the best I can do with it. Your Horsehead looks great.

I just looked at the cost of a 2” Ha nebula filter and it was £216. I’m sure for that money they must be very good but I’m not prepared to pay that much for a filter, especially as the size of the Horsehead I can capture will be so small in the overall image. Thank you for your assistance, it is much appreciated, but I think I will just experiment with the gear I have for now.

No, my Canon is not modded and I do not have an Ha filter. Do I need to get one?

No, I am using the tele-extender to attach my camera to my 8”Celestron, perhaps I should have made that clear. I think I will go ahead and treat the Horsehead nebula as though it were a galaxy and take a stack of images with the ISO at 1600 and the maximum exposure I can get away with which is about 2.5 to 3 mins, depending on how well the PA went. It will have to be the usual case of trial and error. Thank you for your reply.