geeklee

9 minutes ago, Fegato said:

Just a tip

Thanks for posting this Robin, I'll definitely try this approach next time.

HI @Mandy D I believe its the "Sharpened" setting.

Apologies if you've always used this without issue.  I've always found it too much and prefer to take the stack from AS!3 and run deconvolution etc elsewhere.

Can always deselect to easily test if it's not giving expected results this time

11 hours ago, Jim Smith said:

It seems there are two schools of thought!

Thanks Jim.  Even reading that answer I'm not convinced - I don't know why! I'll have a rethink when I'm next out with the gear.

Great shot Wim, the Ha additions look fantastic and help identify the fainter arms even more clearly in NGC 7640.  Super colour in both galaxies.

48 minutes ago, wavydavy said:

Baader 7nm 1.25"................is there anything better,

As well as the more expensive brands you can also look at narrower band pass options (less than 7nm).  These should offer more contrast, subtle going from 7nm to something like 4nm but noticeable (to my eye anyway). 

Is there a particular issue you're having with the Baader 7nm?  I still have fond memories of that filter, even moving on since.

Lovely Dan.  Great star colour, clean and excellent little details.  The PN looks great too.

59 minutes ago, Bluesboystig said:

I'm also thinking that longer integration times will help to get a much better SNR. 

Definitely.  Those of us in lighter skies need to find the right cut off between clear sky/time/results!

1 hour ago, Bluesboystig said:

Re the star shapes: what do you think needs improving? Thanks

When you mentioned a guider could be added, I wondered if that might help tighten up the stars a little and any slight elongation (top to bottom to my eye looking in the middle area).

I'm terrible for viewing images at full size.  Much like the noise that was pretty much invisible looking at the forum size, the stars are also a minor thing.  You've done a great job here.

@Jim Smith @The Admiral Agreed, I believe its guide camera pixels and it's how I've been using it.  I found a few references to this in older posts/release notes but nothing concrete.

I think you've captured a great shot with the equipment Stig - nice natural colour with good detail to enjoy in the galaxy itself.  Nice balanced background too (a little bit of noise but reading your notes above, that's understandable without any NR)

36 minutes ago, Bluesboystig said:

An Asiair mini and guiding camera will help with that hopefully. 

The guide camera should help if the above is unguided - just helping you tidy up those star shapes a little more and let you focus on the next thing (there seems to always be a next thing 🤣)

Great result, with the crescent looking clean and detailed alongside the super stars.  OIII doesn't look overcooked at all.  Well worth the wait to complete that integration time.

45 minutes ago, tooth_dr said:

I removed stars from both images and saved those separately.

45 minutes ago, tooth_dr said:

I used the Ha stars as luminance and the OSC star as colour.

Interesting idea with the Ha as star luminance 👍.  We have some amazing options and approaches for more easily working with stars at the moment.

That's one mre off the list from your tower of data that's been accumulating!  Great job.

1 hour ago, tomato said:

but my OSC data was poor and difficult to  process and of course by comparing it to the HST image I have set the bar rather high.

It sounded like a challenge to bring all the data together (even more impressive) and pulling up an HST image as comparison is always going to give you second thoughts! ☺️

Fantastic @tomato Looks really clear, with well defined details and good colour as well.

2 hours ago, tooth_dr said:

I wasnt initially sure when I saw the OSC stack in APP that the time had been well spent, but when I starting zooming in on the elephant trunk I felt that it was justified.

What an integration Adam!  You've created a superb set of images.  The Trunk looks stunning in mainly (?) RGB, with superb detail - was it tricky to blend the data sets?

Thanks for sharing the Ha too - I couldn't find a bit of noise anywhere! Sharp, detailed and full of contrast.

14 minutes ago, ONIKKINEN said:

I think i suffer a bit too much from the pixel peeper syndrome.

Don't worry, me too (but almost exclusively in my own stuff! 😩😅)

Super shots Oskari, especially the close ups.

Nice one @Domain105 thanks for the follow up  

14 hours ago, Domain105 said:

One thing I didn't mention, that is helping with star and spikes is that I 3D printed a primary mirror clip cover to cover the mirror clips so the diffraction spikes are more clean now.

Yeah, this is a useful mod - mine came with the same.  

My drawtube protrudes into the tube too but I don't think the star impact is too intrusive.

If you wanted to see the single piece secondary spider, I have an image here.

Really glad you got a happy outcome @Domain105 As an owner of a 150P-DS, I really enjoyed the write up of the various options and issues.  I purchased mine second hand so it had some really useful tweaks done already.  I use the 0.9x SW Reducer but on a small sensor.  I recently added the solid secondary spider from Backyard Universe - a noticeable upgrade to collimation stability and minor aesthetic improvements.

Am I right in saying you now have the Baader ClickLock + SW F4 CC?  Does the combination of these mean the draw tube is further out overall, so doesn't protrude into the tube so much?

36 minutes ago, aleixandrus said:

Yeah, the weather was awful and there was moon. I know they are not the best conditions to test the filters but it was rainy and cloudy for 2 months and the prediction for the next weeks is similar. But I needed to test the filters before the ending of the refund window... I know I need more tests and I don't want to return them (I was very happy with my Baader Ha) but I also need to know if I'm doing something wrong...

Definitely understandable that you want to get basic tests done.  Given the moon and weather it's difficult to compare to others.  I can't see anything obvious you're doing wrong given the checks you listed.

37 minutes ago, aleixandrus said:

Regarding focus position, I don't get your point... Despite R and GB focus are of on the Samyang, when shooting mono this should not have major impact.

The filters may be parfocal but the Samyang lens is not bringing all wavelengths of light to focus at the same point.  

38 minutes ago, aleixandrus said:

if filters are parfocal focus position should be similar anyway, at least with narrowband filters. Based on your star diffraction patter, they are (well, somehow).

Similar perhaps, but as I understand it, it depends how well corrected the scope/lens is.  In my image, the red may look "a little off" but it looks noticeably out of focus if I was to shoot my Red/Ha at that focus point.  Likewise, if I have focused for Ha, the OIII will be out of focus.  I see the symptoms of this when shooting OSC on my Samyang.

42 minutes ago, aleixandrus said:

In fact, using my EAF, based on my tests I achieve focus in the ~6500 position for Ha and ~6600 position for S2/O3, which are a lot of motor steps. I'm missing something?

I'm not sure why this is, sorry.  Good idea, trying F4 for focus position although gauging signal gain/loss will be more difficult. 

My Ha and OIII are at least 100 steps apart I'm sure.

I can only suggest to test further where possible and refocus between filters (any filters) and then compare.  

20 hours ago, aleixandrus said:

Is everything OK but I'm just using very little integration? I expect more signal in S2/O3 despite being just one single 300s sub.

Was the moon out during capture?  Could the weather still have had some lingering impact?  I'd hold off making any permanent decisions until you've had another test or two. 

Like @Adreneline my Ha and SII are almost identical in focus as they are both in the red, but I still refocus when changing.  My OIII is different.  This seems standard where the R and GB focus positions are off on the Samyang.  I may have shown this before, but below was a test I made a while back, this was focused for OIII then switched through the RGB filters:

20 hours ago, aleixandrus said:

May I have issues due to band shift as I'm using a faster focal ratio (~f2.7) than the filter specification (>f3.4)?

Perhaps, but with slightly wider filters and stopping down the lens, maybe not too much.  

22 minutes ago, tomato said:

I used StarXTerminator to subtract the fixed stars from the smeared comet and the registered comet from the star trails. The first was 100% ok as the tool treated the comet like a galaxy, the second missed a couple of the trailed stars and seemed to leave a faint ‘ghost’ of the trails which became discernible after further processing. 

I went a little bit of a round about way.  I used StarXTerminator to save all the calibrated, debayered frames as starless.  Then used PI's updated CometAlignment process.  The exported frames from this were then integrated in PI with mainly defaults (the CometAlignment process documentation has a basic workflow and tips).  A little smearing still if pushed too hard. Got:

I did the same as you for the stars though - brought the APP image stacked normally into PI and then extracted the stars.  

43 minutes ago, powerlord said:

how do you stack the comet in APP ? standard settings stack based on stars

Under the "4) Register" tab, change mode to:

You'll then get prompted during registration about time shot metadata and then asked to select the comet nucleus in certain frames (like the first two and then the last, for example).

On 31/01/2023 at 00:06, Zummerzet_Leveller said:

1hr 40mins of 60s exposures with the Redcat51 and the 2600mc unfiltered.

That's excellent Jody.  Great framing in that huge FOV!

Thanks @glafnazur @tomato

If you squint in a darkened room, the faint ion tail is just visible!😅 

That looks great @tomato

Was it tricky bringing the mono and OSC together on this?

12 hours ago, tomato said:

there was noticeable movement on a single 30 sec sub.

I was thinking 60s was a sweet spot but 30s does look better.  I tried 120s too and the nucleus became a very clear line to my eye, although 60s is getting that way.