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.



  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Uranium235 last won the day on November 14 2017

Uranium235 had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

6,501 Excellent

About Uranium235

  • Rank
    Main Sequence

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Not Telling
  • Location
    Worcestershire, UK
  1. Uranium235

    Imaging with the 130pds

    First of last nights efforts, not the best night to be out (moon and dodgy sky) - I guess thats alright for just over 1hr per panel (x2): Taken with the QSI683 10x450 (L) x2
  2. Uranium235

    ASI178MM Cool / Samyang f2 (Veil)

    Or the new WO Redcat
  3. Uranium235

    ASI178MM Cool / Samyang f2 (Veil)

    Thanks yep, that's just one panel. Going short on the FL is probably the best way to make use of the pixel size on that camera.
  4. I've been sitting on this one for a couple of weeks, but cant see why I cant give it an airing not that I'd want to set up tonight, the air out there is just plain toxic at the moment (bonfire smoke with no wind to blow it away)... almost like a smog. Taken with the f2 Samyang and the ASI178MM Cool 60x300 (Ha) Thanks for looking!
  5. Uranium235

    Imaging with the 130pds

    Nice, but probably not best to use the "U" word here, as it gets flagged for approval
  6. I wouldn't say 3.4" is bad, in fact you can get some smashing images at 3.4, this image was taken at that sampling rate: QSI 683 WSG - 2x2bin on the 130pds
  7. Uranium235

    Imaging with the 130pds

    Did what you said mate and did some bad pixel mapping, ive saved it off as well so I can apply it every time. It cleared up about 8pm here, but im just too knackered to set up tonight I'll leave it for another time.
  8. Uranium235

    Imaging with the 130pds

    There ya go, that looks a bit better now Ive taken some calibration frames: Needs more data though I reckon, its just 90min per panel (x2)
  9. Uranium235

    Going To GoTo (Probably)

    There's not much to be confused about. My recommendation is to use as little as possible at first. Just the capture software, PHD and the handset (only resorting to stellarium for sharpless, vdb, ldn, lbn etc). It's an arrangement that's been perfectly adequate for my imaging needs since 2010. Only introduce other elements once it's settled as you don't want to be in the situation where you're struggling to get the software to work as the stars pass you by. There's been a few occasions at star parties where some have their heads down looking at monitors, pushing buttons and scratching heads - while I'm already well into my imaging run with the simple no-nonsense approach
  10. Uranium235

    Going To GoTo (Probably)

    It's either stellarium or eqmod, not both. Though I'm a fan of making things as uncomplicated as possible (less to go wrong). So I use either the handset or stellarium for objects that are not listed in the handset.
  11. Uranium235

    Imaging with the 130pds

    Just a quick update, I'll process it properly with a bit more dynamic range (and with HST colour) hopfully tonight or tomorrow:
  12. Uranium235

    Imaging with the 130pds

    I just need to clarify that this image was taken with a QSI 683 CCD, and 5nm Astrodon filters (both kindly lent to me by davey-t). The 178MM is still attached to the samyang lens and I didn't want to disturb that setup Though a 3.5 micron pixel size might come in very handy for bagging the details of galaxies on the 130pds without going past the theoretical resolving limit of the telescope.
  13. Uranium235

    Imaging with the 130pds

    Its been a while... but here's a little something im working on tonight
  14. Uranium235

    DSS taking hours to stack.........

    knock it up to 30%, or higher should move a lot faster then
  15. Uranium235

    DSS taking hours to stack.........

    What level have you set the star detection threshold at? Try raising it to speed up registration, also make sure DSS has access to use all processors (if using a multi-core CPU).

Important Information

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