jjosefsen

Thank you, and thanks for the headsup. If I may I have one more question.. Does it have built in collimation? It doesn't look like it, but wanted to be sure.

Hi, I was looking at a BDS focuser,but they don't make one with a M90 flange as such.. But for thir refractor version of the BDS it is possible to buy an adapter for Skywatcher Refractors with M90 connection to scope, is this what you did? Adapter: https://www.baader-planetarium.com/en/rt-adapter-m90x1.5-diamond-steeltrack-(skywatcher).html Focuser: https://www.baader-planetarium.com/en/2"-bds-rt-baader-diamond-steeltrack.html

So I tried something else just now.. Used a laser to make sure the focuser was pointing straight at the center of the secondary mirror, and rotating the laser to make sure it still pointing straight at the secondary dot. When I then checked the collimation with my REEGO, and even jsut looking into the focuser it is obvious... But circle that you are supposed to see around the primary mirror, that has to be concentric or equally tick all the way around is completely misaligned. Does this mean that I have a misaligned focuser? And would the tilt aadapter work in this scenario?

It could be yeah... I am just hessitant to throw more money at this scope than I already have..

Yes good is inside, bad is outside.. So sagging makes sense as a possible culprit. Checking the outside focus with extension tubes is doable I think, will give that a go. Thanks for the feedback.

I had the same issue with an Astro-Tech Field Flattener, but I guess the same point remains - the FF could be faulty. Should be clear tomorrow, I will try again without anything else in there. I am wondering if maybe it could also be that the focuser is just not square to the primary mirror, and I would need a tilt plate adapter.

I have been trying to collimate my RC6 using stars and a variation of the DSI method and using a REEGO Pro tool (similar to the TS LED Collimator). When I look into the collimation tool it looks absolutely bang on, even then I would expect to have to do some minor tweaks on a star.. But something is very wrong, and not just small tweaks I think. Camera is a AA 1600m and a TS CCD47 reducer at approximately 85mm of backfocus. This is the edges of my field, when the large star in the middle is in focus (used bhatinov mask), NOT GOOD. This is a star defocused INSIDE of focus, looks OK I think (except some specks on the mirror). This is the same star defocused OUTSIDE of focus, this is much more worse.. Does anyone know if the fact that the star shape is altered so much is due to some sort of image train shift / sagging of the focuser? Any input is much appreciated, this thing is really driving me nuts!!

This thing looks insane I have to ask.. what do you have on there? APM something..

Honestly that makes perfect sense, thank you for that explanation. Any processing on linear data needs to be done in 32bit preferably and then I can go to 16bit when non-linear. I already have a workflow in mind then..

Thank you for that explanation, I need to re-read the top part again to understand all of it. But in regards to the quoted part..: If I do my stretching of the fits files in Affinity Photo (which supports 32bits) and then convert from 32bit to 16bit after, then it is "OK" if I understand you correctly. Because by stretching the data before I will have done dynamic range compression? 🤔

Hi, I have been playing with Affinity Photo for image processing, and I find that I really like the application and the more visual way of processing the images, compared to for instance PI (I know I am probably crazy...) One problem I have though is that in order for me to use either Starnet++ or StarXTerminator for separating stars and nebulosity, I have to go from 32bit to 16bit.. But I am honestly struggling a little bit with wrapping my head around how much of a difference it makes in the end? I appreciate that 32bit images contain a lot more information than 16 bit images. But then again I am using a camera with a 12bit sensor, so does it really matter? Any insights or thoughts are welcome! Even if you have ways of separating stars from background with as good results as these machine learning plugins do, then that is also appreciated.

The beta is very stable, so don't feel like it is a big risk using that.. It could be in beta for quite a while.

This is an absolutely fantastic image. The FOV is impressive and the processing is just to my liking, the colors, the background... 👌 There are some artifacts around some of the brighter stars, which could look like results of blendings images with a pronounced difference in star sizes (ha vvs oii perhaps?). But this one for sure goes into the bookmark folder I have for images with the look and feel i like..

What a beautiful build..! Way to go!

Hi, Did you manage to get your RC sorted? I have spent a lot of hours trying to sort mine out now. I feel like I am just chasing my own tail though, it never really gets really good.

Following this guide it took me 15 minutes.

It's already been mentioned, but: Nighttime Imaging 'N' Astronomy – An astrophotography imaging suite (nighttime-imaging.eu) It is truly a great piece of software, and it is free!

It’s not exactly what I’ve been doing, but it makes sense. I will try it. What confused me was the fact that they seemed to collimate different on/off axis differently. But I suppose it doesn’t matter as long as the optical axis just ends up aligned.

This is looking great! I wish my stars looked like that.

Sorry to but in here, but I am working on collimating my RC6 as well, and have a question. I have been using this Deep Space Place to collimate, but haven't gotten it really great yet. But last night I was looking at the DSI method, and noted something. DSI: On axis collimation done with primary mirror, off axis collimation done with secondary. DSP: On axis collimation with secondary mirror, off axis with primary mirror. Does it not matter in the end? I have an aweful lot of weirdly shaped stars around the edges.

That is some setup!!

For only an hour per panel I think it looks very good! 👍

Hi, I doubt this is vignetting, your images should be getting darker not brighter around the edges. Try calibrating without flats, does your issue persist? I'm going to guess that they are - because I have the same problems with the same camera. It seems to be in the dark frame calibration and for me it is only a problem with broadband filters.. But I would love to see what happens if you try to calibrate without flats and compare, and without darks and compare.

Hi, I am shooting LDN 1235 at the moment, and I was considering just doing R,G,B and forgoing luminance and just creating a synthetic luminance from the R,G,B subs later. I've done similar things before with pretty good results: https://www.astrobin.com/full/412663/B/?nc=user I really want to catch the faint colors of the reflection nebulae and the brown dust in this object, and was thinking that going really deep on all the color channels would do that, and possibly not missing much as it doesn't appear there is too much fine contrasty detail to be had.. Opinions would be very welcome. :)

Good lord that is something else!