teoria_del_big_bang

Not looking too good I am afraid, let's hope CO has it wrong, it does happen. Steve

Ha Ha, yes I too do not like looking at an image with hot pixels but we all have them 🙂 I will be following thread with interest but I am at a star camp in South of UK tomorrow and not even packed my scope up yet or anything else so must get on and pack things into the car. Typical UK weather though looking at forecast looks like they may not be that much imaging actually going on 😞 We really should host these things n Spain I think in future 🤣 Steve

You say obviously the same is that definite ? Are we sure the master dark is not affecting anything other than hot pixels etc ? Light leak whilst taking darks could be an issue , just a thought. Steve

True, yes that's correct now I think about it. And yes something does not make any sense. If there was an issue causing the lighter corners on the lights, such as light leak, internal reflections in the imaging train, or just the way the filters are working then why would the flats be as you would expect being darker at the corners and outer edge, you would expect the flats (if evenly luminated) to show the same. Steve

Hi Miguel, Is this an issue you think you have had all along because lately you have had some magnificent images and not mentioned any issues. Or is it just this target because as I say I am no expert but this is not an easy target and is a very faint object. When I look at the single frame in PI there is actually very little signal there. So I could be wrong here but if I were to attempt this target with NB filters I think I would be going for more than 180 seconds exposures so that the signal is far greater than the noise. Not that that should affect any vignetting (I wouldn't think). So I know you have a fair number of frames to stack (40) and usually 180 secs * 40 would be good for this camera maybe this target on NB requires longer exposures. I really cannot say why the reverse vignetting but if you look at the actual pixel values of background in the corners compared to the pixels of background closer to middle there is very little difference I think it is just the low signal means that PI is really boosting the stretch to see the nebulosity and so any changes in pixel values no matter how small look bad to the eyes. Sorry I cannot help further but probably I am not experienced enough on this. Steve

I do not have the exact same setup but do have same scope and camera but not even sure the setup really matters. But I do not really understand your issue. I am no expert and still learning but I think we would need to see a full image not just a preview and ideally upload the raw image. Also must have at least a flat or better still a master flat. I think whatever the camera you are going to get gradients and vignetting, and a start to remove those is calibrating with good flats. Calibrating an image with only a dark is not going to remove gradients or vignetting , all cameras taking images of feint nebulas will show gradients and vignetting when stretching uncalibrated images. Even after good calibration you will still have some gradients that then can be removed during the processing. From what I see on the image in your post it looks to be mostly vignetting that is normal and will be greatly reduced with good calibration using flats. It looks bad but an auto-stretched image without proper calibration will look bad for vignetting. Like I say I am no expert but from that one image it is difficult to say if there is an issue there or not Steve

THIS was the thread I remember, same issues but not sure if it relates to your issue or not but might be worth a read. Steve

I have seen a thread on this on SGL in the past and not sure what the end result was. If you have another power supply you could try that but I seem to remember that the conclusion was something to do with the power supply being switched mode and a missing earth on the mount, I could be totally wrong and remembering this all wrong but will have a quick search on SGL see if I can find it. Also may have not been a HEQ5 but same issue with a mount. Steve

very nice indeed 🙂 Steve

The more I use the new WBPP the more I love it. Okay it takes its time (on my PC anyway 🙂 ) but at least now you can see what it is doing as it goes so not just sat there with no response for 2 hours or so, but I like how quick it is now when you just add another nights data to an existing set of data together with some new flats for the new data, it zooms through most of the stuff as it knows it already has preprocessed that and just does the new stuff, it of course has to redo some of the preprocessing and all of the post processing stuff to integrate the new data but it is so much quicker. And using the keywords it is so esy to add new data and flats without having to group manually. Steve

Good tip from @markse68 This may not be the best way but my attempts I found if you just used a pointed tip directly on the insert it tended to get stuck inside the insert when you went to take the tip away and everything just overheated and the hole became too big and the insert moved sideways, or the insert came back out with the soldering iron, or at best the insert stuck okay but was not straight. So what I did (right or wrong) was when I printed the part I made most of the hole the reccomended diameter for the inserts used but the top 2 mm or so I made a bit wider so the insert actually was just a tight fit there and could be easily forced into the depression and stayed. I then had a screw inside the insert and applied the heat to the screw using a flat ended tip rather than a full pointed tip and then pushed it in that way and was able to get the inserts nice and straight and the screw helps to prevent the brass insert too hot. Seemed to work for me anyway. But plenty of videos on youtube showing methods how to do it. Steve

The brass inserts are brilliant but can be tricky to insert and get them straight without just melting a bigger hole that makes the print useless. I am no expert on using them and only dabbled with them so I would do a bit of searching on Google for advice. I think you can also but propper tools to insert them rather than using the bare end of a soldering iron which if doing a few of them may be a good investment. Following with interest 🙂 Steve

My first astro camp so would be nice to know who on SGL is attending if you are happy for your whereabouts to be known 😂 If you are then please reply and I will add the info to this OP for everyone to see. If you are happy for it to be displayed things like pitch, dates attending, actual name, whether observing or imaging and maybe an idea of equipment you hope to bring. Unfortunately CO is reporting a fairly bad week at the moment but let's be hopeful as it often get it wrong and can change before we attend. If you have any equipment to sell or swap also could mentiion in your post for people to see (if thats allowed - mods PM me if only allowed in classified section) teoria_del_big_bang Steve 311 - Red 20th to 27th Imaging - Esprit 100ED / QHY268M + QHY FW petevasey Peter 313 - Red Imaging if clear long enough! - SharpStar 140, TS65 quad. AstroKeith Keith 329 - Red - 18" Dob, AllSkyCamera https://astrokeith.com apaulo Paul 257 - Blue 20th to 27th - starfield 102 and 200p reflector carastro Carole 311 - Red 20th to 27th paulastro Paul 138 - Yellow 20th to 27th -Celestron StarSense Explorer 8 inch Dob -----------> with paulastro Andy (Astronomy Centrer Todmorden) -Radio Ham & radio astronomer powerlord Stu 418 - Red 23rd to 25th Imaging - AM5, EQ5 , 200pds , C925 , wide angle stuff redcat + 135mm / asi533 / asi2600 Anne S Anne 149 Yellow 19th to 27th - Ioptron IEQ45 +152 & 60mm refractors, Ioptron IEQ30pro +70mm refractor, Atik camera for imaging. & Ioptron tracking mount to capture wide field images. baggywrinkle 118 Yellow arriving Thursday 22nd flying a White Ensign over a Submarine Service flag....(in the day only....)

Hi, Just woke up to check how the imaging went and seen this. I am glad the camera is good and works at least. Just so you know I too have my camera going via my Pegasus PBA the USB from the PPBA to PC is 2M and it has worked fine. I normally like to connect ccd directly to computer to stop any issues like this but to save runnung a 2nd usb3 cable from rig to PC when I got the PPBA I ran it via a USB3 port on that and it seemed to work okay so used it that way the past 2 years or so. Steve

Ha Ha , yes I think thats better sketch than I could do Steve

That is the tip so the other end is in his hand. But I could be wrong in that interpretation, I have see him sketched in somewhere but cant seem to find it at moment, I know I am correct about his hat but take the hands and wand with a pinch of salt. Certainly not as obvious as say the Horsehead Steve

Great image. I think the Wizard is easier to see in mono and it does take some working out but once you see him so long as the hat is at the top then I think you always wee him 🙂 I think below is how it appears to me anyway Steve

I now use one of THESE from DSD but mostly so I can automate the flats in my sequencer and they are taken for each filter used in the session automatically at the end of session (I use NINA and it will close the panel turn on the LED light set it to the correct intensity for the filter and take a set mumber of exposures all whilst I am still sleeping 🙂 ). If you do not need the automation then there are cheaper ones such as This one Steve

As @tomato says take the positives thats what keeps us going forward in what can be a long road to success. After 4 1/2 years since getting my first scope I still very much consider myself a newbie but I am getting there and proud of what I have learned in this short time, a lot with help from other SGL members I admit. For what it is worth this is fundementally what I personally have percieved about AP (so it is my thoughts not necessarily all correct). Starting this hobby / obsession can be a nightmare giving you many headaches as some of the terms can be confusing. But over time and practice using your equipment as often as you can, even on poor seeing nights just to get used to taking data it does get much easier and in fact becomes second nature. As you have experience before then this may not be such an issue although I am sure during your absence a fair bit has changed, especially in equipment and probably moreso in the processing software available. I think to a certain extent the better the equipment the easier getting good data can get. Now, I agree many people do get great images from minimal equipment but I still think it is more difficult. For me getting a good sturdy mount well capable of carrying the payload I have and also getting a good scope, quality mono CCD and filters OR a quality modern OSC transformed my data. Unfortunately these days that does not come cheap and so often at least in the early days you have to go with what you have which may not be what you really desire but I would still say try to obtain the best equipment you can afford over time, using the 2nd hand market where you can. Fairly early on I was lucky to come into some extra cash due to working abroad for extended time. This was not a fortune but did help me buy some decent equipment fairly early on in my time in AP. Another thing I did learn early on is that despite getting what, for me, seemed good data was that that was probably less than half the story and that the road to getting great images, maybe even just good images, was the processing side, which at the very start I had not realised and thought just get the images stack them and stretch them a bit and voila hubble quality images. Wow was I wrong 🙂 For sure I have since spent the last 3 years or so developing my processing skills and still have a long way to go. Again good quality software for processing also really helps, and there are free options and some costing a fair bit, but I will not go into which to use as that really can cause a lot of discussion, but if you get into a good way of processing you are comfortable with stick with it and learn it well. It can be a long road to sucess, not helped by poor skies with LP for many of us so great patience is required and the ability to not get downhearted and take heart from small improvement each session. Many sessions be prepared to get no useful data but if for instance you manage to learn how to do something, or set something up so it works correctly then that is a succesful session even if that took all night and you got no real useful data to process. Just do everything step by step. First of all you need good data, and often lots of it, but certainly good data so take time to get your data as good as possible. To an extent longer exposures can help depending on what camera you are using and how good your guiding is.. Fortunately, with some of the more modern CMOS cameras there is no need for long (10 min +) exposures for most targets and more shorter exposure is just as good, often better if your guiding is not spot on. Also using shirter exosures allows you to be more aggressive with discarding bad images due to guiding errors, sky quality etc as it is easier to discared a few 180 sec exposures that one 20 min exposure. Good data I think is a must, no end of expensive processing software can create good final images from poor data. Once you think you are getting optimal data for your equipment and sky quality from your location then it is down to processing and that takes practice but SGL can help and posting your images, even sometimes your data then other members can often do wonders with it and give you some grat tips. As a final thing from my ramble is that do not give up on flats. For quality images you need quality calibration data, bias, darks, flats and dark flats, they are all important (I think so anyway). I too could never get good sky flats, I tried and tried and was never happy, to me they t hampered my early images rather than help them. When I got a good flat frame generator that really improved everythng for me. Look out for a good 2nd hand one or do some searching there are many other light panels out there which are pretty cheap people have used for flats. Sorry for the long ramble but stick with it and never worry about asking for help on SGL, we all have to 🙂 Steve

Ah actually now I look closer I think the link to the item is not what you need, another site suggest ths has M65 male and female threads. https://astromart.com/classifieds/astromart-classifieds/telescope-refractor/show/astro-essentials-filter-cell-adapter-for-sky-watcher-esprit-flatteners Steve

Just had a look. This is how it came with the 2" eyepiece holder , which I assume is how you are using it now. You have to remove the 2" eyepiece holder. Then screw on the FF with a M74 to M65 adaptor, which I am assuming is the piece you say you are missing, shown between red arrows. I am sure that THIS will do the same with the advantage that you can screw a 2" fikter (maybe a LP suppression filter) inside it. I cannot find out for sure the male thread on this as it needs to be M65 but you could message @FLO amd ask if it will do the job. Steve

So is it the dedicated FF for the Esprit 100ED? If it is I have the same setup but I cannot remember fitting an adapter but let me look at my setup as I am just tinkering with it now so wil take a few pics and see if that helps you. Steve

Well do not go on line after a couple of glasses of wine or ale as it tends to skint me. Steve

I too may do the same, if not now I have a full week at Kelling next week so lots of time without all the jobs around the house to do so should have plenty of time. I guess you really need to test a variety of images, some with lots of nebulosity, some with very bright stars etc. Steve

I have not done any thorough comparisons but on the image I was using to do the tests whilst my comuter kept failing when I got it working StarXTerminator did seem to do better than Starnet2. There were two big stars that left awful glows around them when I originally processed the image that were greatly improved with StarXTerminator using either AI 11 or the lite version. That was using the 20% overlap I did not try the 50% overlap option but I guess that may further improve things but at the suggested 3X longer to run on my computer I will have a fair wait. Generally so far I have always used both processes and then compared the images to see which is the best and go with that one but knowing that one is always significantly better would be great and save time in the future. Steve