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_christmas_presents.thumb.jpg.587637e0d01baf4b6d21b73610610bbb.jpg

Lead_weight

New Members
  • Content Count

    25
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

16 Good

About Lead_weight

  • Rank
    Nebula

Contact Methods

  • Website URL
    Www.macobservatory.com

Profile Information

  • Location
    Houston
  1. Ahh, good to know that this probably is. It did look like something a buffing motion might create. I don’t see them in the LRGB filters, so assumed it was something related to the coating on the narrowband filters.
  2. My flats look exactly the same. OIII is the worst or has the most visible stripes across it. I have an Astrodon 5nm OIII filter. It shows up some on SII as well, and not really visible on HA. It doesn't matter whether I shoot flats with a t-shirt, use a light box, an iPad, or the sky, they all have the same pattern. I suspect it's the coating on the filters. But in any case, it fully corrects out using any of the above methods. So I regularly use a flat panel.
  3. I get between 1.8-2.4 on my 102mm refractor. On my 6" RC I get between 4-6, though I feel like I've seen lower, I just don't always watch it that closely. A lot of it is seeing dependent.
  4. I've followed a few threads on Cloudy Nights, and apparently 10 min subs are the limit for the 183. Any longer and the amp glow begins to become uncorrectable. Though you should be able to go for as long as 10 min.
  5. I'm not sure it matters. So long as you can send commands to the mount either through the handset or by plugging directly into the mount, the mount will just ignore the handset. All the mount sees is an incoming command from a com port.
  6. I always thought it looked a bit like a manta ray from the top down.
  7. Spent the last three nights imaging these three objects. Managed to get them all in the same frame of my ES 102mm FCD100 scope. Pretty happy with how it turned out. I would have liked to have grabbed a little more SII data. When I originally captured it, I thought I might only have two clear nights, so I imaged it as HA/OIII. Turns out there's almost no OIII. On the third night, clouds were supposed to roll in about 4am, cutting the imaging session short, but it stayed clear the whole night, and I got a full night of data with the exception that I got a late start due to technical issues when I first started imaging. The ASI1600's halos are rearing their ugly heads on the two brightest stars. I tried to tone them down some by desaturating the colors around both stars...it worked a bit. Another 15 hours and I could probably get rid of any remaining grain, but just don't have the clear nights to get it done. 15.8 hours total imaging time. Equipment: Celestron CGX Explore Scientific 102mm FCD100 ZWO ASI1600MM-C ZWO Filter Wheel with Astrodon 5nm filters ZWO ASI290MM Mini guide camera Stellarvue F50G guide scope
  8. Is there an equivalent version of this scope in the U.S.? I would love one of these smaller fast scopes, but can't seem to find an equivalent, and SkyWatcher doesn't carry it on the U.S. site.
  9. I'll provide my own observations here...no science though! I typically image narrowband at around 200 gain. Since most of the light is filtered out, it takes more exposure time to get signal onto the chip. I also don't have amazing equipment, but stuff that is suitable for the weight and focal length of my scopes. That said, I can't run longer exposures (5min+) without starting to see more issues with tracking. So I image narrowband in my bottle 6 sky 200 gain, 3 min exposures. For LRGB, I typically set gain to 76, this was a number someone on Cloudy Nights came up with as a better option than unity for a little more dynamic range and less noise. I usually expose for 60s to keep under my light pollution ceiling. Anyhow, these settings have worked great for me. All options are a trade off. And no one setting works best. But you should experiment a little with your skies to find some settings that work well for you. One final observation that I've learned after doing this for the last two years is that more integration time is always better. I'm now regularly spending one night's imaging session per filter. And, when I started, I was imaging multiple objects in a single night, giving no more than 1-2 hours per object. What I do now has had a huge impact on the overall quality of my images.
  10. I've had really good luck with my AVX. All my photography is done with it. But I've taken particular care to stick under the rated weight limit, and a focal length of no more than about 900mm. For visual you can go above that, but for imaging, you'll find it's not precise enough (even with guiding) go do longer focal lengths or heaver imaging setups (above 20lbs).
  11. I just recently spent some time writing a tutorial for processing a bi-color image in APP. Here's a link. I find that it's way easier, and produces really good results without a lot of effort as far as integration and calibration go. I also find it's light pollution removal feature hands down better than Pi. All that said, Pi has some very nuanced features that cover modifying your images in ways APP just isn't up to par with...yet. I like to do all preprocessing in APP, then touch up in PI and Photoshop.
  12. They are, however, there are brands that have taken steps to aid in putting unmounted filters into the filter wheel correctly. Some use a tape label around the rim of the filter indicating the direction, or some put anti-reflective coating on both sides of the filter so it doesn't matter which direction they face. But just do a little research so that your decision is sound. Definitely do a forum search for the type of filters you're looking into, you might find they have other issues that would warrant choosing a different product anyway. You can also use the filter size calculator at Astronomy.tools to check your scope and camera configuration to ensure you get filters large enough to accommodate the FOV available to you. You may find you need unmounted filters.
  13. I've never used DSS, but that order sounds correct. If you want to supply a download link to all your data (lights, flats, bias, darks), I'd be happy to give it a go on processing to see if I can produce some decent results with what you have. Might also reveal where the issue is.
  14. Hi Andrew :). Very cool. I bet you could also use Astro DSLR, PHD, and EQMac (a port of EQ Mod to the Mac) all natively on the Mac.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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