teoria_del_big_bang

Just now, alacant said:

Dunno.

Sybony stuff to Spain usually takes under a week. I believe AliExpress have European warehouses; the shipping is always from within the EU.

They do still ship to UK, and in the past I think some has come from EU warehouses , some I ordered did arrive that had come from China, it was just that the links you put on were on the AliExpress Spain site and did not ship to UK for some reason but I think others stock the same items if you look.

Steve

11 minutes ago, alacant said:

AliExpress don't ship to UK? I never realised that. Sorry.

Really ? 
Is that a result of Brexit then as they certainly used to ?
Shame as so long as you were not in a rush for something they were quite good for some accesories. 

Ah AliExpress do ship to UK, I thought they still did, it was just that particular seller on AliExpress that did not ship to UK, pleanty of other seller selling similar do.

Steve

2 minutes ago, mgutierrez said:

Thanks Steve. Yes, esprit and the 268. Great combo 😄

That gives me moivation to try again, mind you dark skies probably help with this target, I struggle from Home with LRGB. Looks like most of the detail is added via the Luminance so perhaps that is what I should concentrate on 🙂 

Steve

Another great image Miguel, this is a target I have tried recently but weather was not good and much clouds passing stopped me getting any decent detail.
I take it this was with the Esprit 100 and the QHY268M ?

Like the others above I love the image and you have capured lots of the dark stuff 🙂 

Steve

13 minutes ago, scotty38 said:

You are being over cautious. Just blow it out or fetch it out with a thin bit of "something", don't need to over think this at all.

Having said that I don't think it'll make the slightest scrap of difference....

I would agree, so long as power is off just blow out with a straw or something or pck it out with something, a tywrap or whatever, I can't even see a small screwdriver would damage anything.
But, also doubt this is causing an issue unless it is a very dirty or wet leaf. However still better to remove it.

Steve

I have no idea but  I would contact them via email to begin with, you never know they may even just send you a replacement screw.

wo@williamoptics.com

Hope you get it all back together soon 🙂 

Steve

It was so much easier when I was at school and being told atoms were made from only protons, electrons and neutrons.
This stuff absolutely mesmorises me but I cannot get my head round much of it.
One thing that always sent my head into meltdown was trying to imagine how light works and how it can be a particle and a wave. Maybe one reason I am so enthrawled with imaging as I marvel at catching some of that light that has travelled for so long, from so far, on my little ccd chip and then bringing that to life for all to see 🙂 
Better stop my head hurts now 🙂 

EDIT: I know this thought has been disproved but I love to think that 1000's of years ago something, so far away that it is hard to imaging the distances, emitted some photons because it knew eventually they would land on my CCD chip and so set off as photons and not a wave. All wrong I know but what a lovely thought 🙂 

Steve

On a final note that has the ability to be a great image as even using those 5 lights there is a lot of detail in their and the framing is excellent 🙂 
Nothing really done apart from trying to remove the gradients I had and star removal to see what was in the nebula and looks very promising, please post the final image.

Steve

On another note, nothing really to do with your OP, but are you sure your Master Flat is correct ?
One reason I ask is I let WPBB go through is stuff using the master flat the resulting image had fairly bad vignetting (much lighter towards the outside of the frame and corners especially)  but if I don't calibrate with the flat it looks better.

Left image is WITH flats and right WITHOUT.

I am not used to OSC data so originally I forgot to debayer the flat and thought it looked odd but now I remembered and debayered it it looks like a normal flat but just seems to be over-correcting the final image as the dark corners of the flat end up making the final image a lot lighter in the corners.

Unless I am doing something wrong as I said I am not that used to OSC data and also pretty new to all this anyway especially the processing side 🙂 

Steve

40 minutes ago, Ouroboros said:

I have been following this thread with interest as a newbie to WBPS.  Well done to those who worked out what was causing the problem. It’s threads like this that really prove the value of sites like SGL.

Does PI not produce an error report that would have highlighted the issue? 

 

It does create a log of the process run but in this case it did not help much as it just said the integration had failed with no hint to why.

But then there is the Process Console which displays and keeps a record of all processes carried out and any fault or warning messages.
This is best place to look to see why something unexpected occurred.
There there were several errors (errors are in red, warnings which means it has not failed but something is maybe unexpected are in pink), one put me onto the problem and said:
*** Error: Mismatched CFA patterns between the master dark and flat frames: '', 'RGGB'
<* failed *>

Steve

Right found the issue.

The issue is with one of the darks.
The 1 second dark is okay and has the RGGB debayer keyword in the header:

But the 600S does not:

If I add the keyword "BAYERPAT" and set it to "RGGB" then with auto selected WBPP works fine.

Did you create the 600S master dark using something other than Pixinsight ?
If so then that would cause this issue, so maybe best in future to do as @Stuart1971 suggests and to always select RGGB instead of using auto.

Steve

5 minutes ago, Stuart1971 said:

Yes I have watched so many of his videos I lose track of what was in which video….😂😂

But I think it’s prudent to pick the bayer, as it’s one less thing that can go wrong, especially if it’s already been highlighted as a potential fault…

Oh don't get me wrong, this is good advice and agree totally, it's just that WPBB should be capable of picking this up from the Fits header and I am now curious to why.

Steve

2 minutes ago, Stuart1971 said:

I saw somewhere that it is always best to state the debayer pattern as the auto setting does not always work, this was on an Adam Block video if I recall…

There is something about that in his videos I just went through them again but the one I saw about it was that it was not in the fits header and so the Auto method failed. So far the images I checked did have something in the headers to state it was RGGB but not checked them all yet as still running WBPP (slow PC 😞 ) .

Steve

12 minutes ago, scotty38 said:

Same as you I can make it work by specifying RGGB as the pattern yet use the debayer process on the files and auto works.....

That was going to be my next step.
So very odd that the PI debayer process works but it fails in WBPP, could it be the flats or darks that it cannot match the pattern with the lights ?

Steve

Cant look at moment as the WBPP is still running but got past the calibration stage that was the issue.

I copied some of the 5 lights to make a reasonable number of frames so it would use the same integration method

Hi,

I am not sure why you need to do this, there will be a reason but it seems it cannot determine the debayer pattern automatically and if you specify RGGB then it seems to work.

I will try to find out why it cannot pick this up from the Fits header.

Steve

Well I get the same fault, so looking now to see why

Its just from the images you posted I cannot see anything wrong.
Basically put lights in the lights tab, flats in the flats tab, Bias in the bias tab, darks and flat darks (or dark flats whatever you want to call them) in the darks tab.
Lights should have darks at same exposure criteria (exposure time, temperature, gain and offset ), flats also darks (if using flat darks) at same exposure criteria (exposure time, temperature, gain and offset ).

From the calibration tab image that looks okay although I suspect this image is NOT from the first time you tried this as after the first run through it will replace the darks and flats with the master dark and fmaster flat.

You also need to specify a reference frame or select auto and WBPP will select the reference or make one from several frames.
Setup the process icon for CosmeticCorrection (optional).
And without selection various other options I think that is it.

All I can think is maybe there is something in the Fits headers that is making WBPP think that the darks and flats are not compatible with the lights.

Without having a go or seeing the lights and calibration frames it is difficult to say what is happening.

Maybe at least a couple of lights and the master calibration frames would be a start.

Steve

Can you upload the lights and master dark / flat / bias, maybe via Google drive or similar and I will try to run the process ?

Steve

Hello and welcome to SGL, as plenty of questions, no question is a stupid question and maybe tell us a little about yourself and what you want to do astro wise 🙂 

Steve

Yes, connecting to IOptron commander first seems to work.

Steve

I don't  really want to get involved in a tennis style argument and giving advice on electrics,  especially outside installations. is maybe something we all should stay clear of unless a qualified and up to date with current regs electrical engineer.
Having said that I think we all should have a pretty good idea of what should be done, and what  a paid qualified electrician would install, and that is often what many of us do not adhere to, and because generally we do not use our setups in very damp conditions, and certainly not in rain, we still consider it safe and will generally all have no issues even on prolonged use like that.

Having said that, I guess we should still not recommend using non compliment installations.
Most of us at some time will use extension reels, hopefully fully extended  even if using a 25M reel that is only 10M away from socket, and also hopefully all protected with RCD, and although I am not up to date anymore with current regs I would guess that is not illegal ???
But however we get electrics to our mount or obsy should be done correctly, or we take the risk ourselves and had to be our own choice, and the best advice is always if in doubt don;t do it and ask a qualified electrician.

So maybe Gents this back and forth arguing is not helping the OP ?

Steve

I can only agree with comments above, firstly that they are both absolutely fantastic images, definitely some of the best Bubble images I have seen with such detail 🙂  and secondly I also prefer the 2nd image, but not much in it tbh.

Steve

11 minutes ago, MartinB said:

I think people like to post that they used pixel math!  

Sounds funny but yes I bet you are right 🙂 

Steve

3 minutes ago, Ikigai_sky said:

@teoria_del_big_bang thanks so much. I hope that you get some clear skies soon to try adding to your image. I have bottle 6 skies so it isn't ideal. I get issues with light pollution, sometimes it creates quite a gradient in my background which I find difficult to tackle. I think maybe the position of Iris is helping to avoid the gradient effect which I'm happy about 😁

Bortle 6 same as me, no idea looking at CO when I may get a chance again, probably near full moon , it usually is the case 🤣

Steve