Jump to content

Banner.jpg.b83b14cd4142fe10848741bb2a14c66b.jpg

EyeGuy

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    129

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    2

 Content Type 

Everything posted by EyeGuy

  1. EyeGuy
    Man - that is seriously useful. Thanks for posting this. Suddenly makes sense. Barry
  2. EyeGuy
    So I finally got my Vixen SXP rig set up the way I want - literally 10 minute set up time. This is 6 hours and 45 minutes integration of 81 X 5 minute subs taken with a Canon EOS Ra through a Tak Sky 90 on a Vixen SXP with an OPT Triad filter last night. All processing in PixInsight. Comments / criticisms welcome. Barry PS - my first ever automated meridian flip on APT while I slept! Good times.
  3. EyeGuy
    Thanks Steve. It's a real treasure trove of objects. What do you think of the reprocess? Better / Worse? Barry
  4. EyeGuy
    That's a stunning image. Beautifully captured and processed. Jaw-dropping stuff. Every time I see an FSQ 130 image I feel angry at myself for not getting one when they were available. *glass jealousy intensifies* 🙂 Barry
  5. EyeGuy
    This was 3 night's work with a Takahashi Sky 90 on a self-guiding Vixen SXP mount from the back yard. I used a triad filter on a Canon EOS Ra at ISO 800. 157 x 5 min subs = 13 hours integration time (my longest yet by far) Processed in PI and PS. I drizzled again (sorry Vlad - I just can't help myself) and was pretty happy with the level of detail from a 407mm FL. The wide shots show a fair bit of astigmatism in the corners - but I thought the Sky 90 did pretty well. The Vixen SXP is a dream to use - it's lovely to be able to do the entire thing without a laptop. Annoyingly I had the mount in the wrong mode (Dec off) for 2 nights so the stars are a bit eggy, but I didn't have the heart to throw out the data. I think the smallest crop is a bit reminiscent of the dementers in Harry Potter. Barry * Edit - I had another go at reprocessing this. I think I left the originals far too muted. I redid them as LRGB, with the red channel (HA really) as the luminance layer). Thoughts anyone? Better before of after? Barry
  6. EyeGuy
    Lovely image. I love your colour balance and you've left a nice natural, soft look. I was going to shoot this target the other night too and thought I'd set up 2 rigs for the first time. I ended up cocking up both setups, imaging with neither and then taking them both down as the clouds rolled in. Barry
  7. EyeGuy
    That's a real beauty. Lovely framing too. I have the colour version of that camera - it takes a bit of getting used to but I'm definitely liking it more and more. I can't wait to give the veil another crack later in the year. Barry
  8. EyeGuy
    Thanks for taking the time to give that very detailed description, Vlad. It's very much appreciated. I remember trying to process some Nikon NEF raw files as individual mono, but I screwed the whole thing up and it ended up a mess. I could try to give it a go again with what you've said above. I don't think I'd bother on the data from the Needle - especially since it's perfectly sampled for my setup, but I have a Moravian OSC which I kind of bought in error. I read the 6um pixel size and thought that sounded great - but pixel size on normal commercial cameras is very different to pixel size on astronomical cameras. When you figure the bayer matrix in the real pixel size is 12um - which is badly undersampled. (at least, I think this is how it works - anyone can correct me if I'm wrong). Anyway, I'll give that a go like you suggest - but I think I'm coming down with Covid-19 now so we'll have to see... Thanks again, and best wishes, Barry
  9. EyeGuy
    Thanks for that - in this instance the camera was a Canon EOS Ra. My typical workflow for preprocessing is Adam Bloch's method. It's basically the same as the script, but done manually to look for trouble as you go. So the debayering happens, I think, as PI loads the images. How would I go about processing the greyscale images and then combining? I'm afraid to mess with the camera raw loading options as the last time I did that I screwed everything up 🙂 Barry
  10. EyeGuy
    I tried Bayer drizzle - but PI told me it wasn't a Bayer image, though it was, so I gave up quickly and just went with the usual drizzle. If I get a chance I'll process it without the drizzle and post here for comparison - maybe a very small closeup would be useful. You're probably right that it made no difference - but it sure makes enormous files.
  11. EyeGuy
    It's in the filename. When I'm processing I name the file according to what I've done at each step so I can retrace. Vlad clearly has eagle eyes. 🙂
  12. EyeGuy
    I don't, I'm afraid, and it would be v hard to show on the website. I was of the same opinion until this image, and it's not like the difference was striking, but I was convinced it was a little better with drizzle when I examined the 2 with same zoom settings in PI. Maybe just my imagination as the sampling really is just about spot on for my scope. Barry
  13. EyeGuy
    Thanks! Glad you like it. I'm really starting to like the EOS Ra.
  14. EyeGuy
    Well spotted! It's funny - I didn't think drizzle would make any difference at all because the sampling is about right with 5.34um pixels, but it definitely seemed to increase the detail a tiny bit when I zoomed in, and it made edges more pleasing. Barry
  15. EyeGuy
    It was a TEC 180 FL - I tagged it at the top of the thread but the tags aren't very conspicuous on SGL. Barry
  16. EyeGuy
    I found a new spot in the garden, more shielded from street lights, so this was taken with no filters a couple of nights ago, under bortle 6 skies. 5 min subs X 32 = 160 min integration time Processed in PI and Photoshop. Barry
  17. EyeGuy
    I added a tighter crop and a little sharpening - maybe better? I'm not sure I love the colour.
  18. EyeGuy
    This is from a couple of nights ago. It clouded in quickly, so I didn't get much data. The temp was 2C, and I'm self-isolating - so that was also a factor! I only took 5 darks before I gave up and went to bed. I'll take more when the temp is right. This is 140 min integration time on a new Canon EOS Ra with 17x500s exposures, and no filter (from the city). Processed in PI and Photoshop - I should have used more star masks but the data aren't good enough to warrant the effort I think. I also had difficulty with flats - I tried a range of exposures with a Gerd Neumann panel, but I think they were all too short. Will go longer than 0.3s next time - very hard to figure out flat exposure on DSLRs, and APT's tool doesn't work for DSLRs yet. I think I'm obsessed with M51 - and I know I'll be back to it again. Stay safe everyone, Barry
  19. EyeGuy
    Both are beautiful. I love the natural, subtle processing look.
  20. EyeGuy
    I can’t stop looking at this image. It’s a real stunner. It has a beautiful 3 dimensional look to it, so much so that the surrounding nebula almost looks reflected in the bubble. You’ve done justice to a real jewel of the Northern hemisphere. Barry
  21. EyeGuy
    I hate them both! just kidding. Both real tour de forces and very impressive. There’s definitely a bit more detail visible in the second (bottom) version. They’re both very pleasing to the eye and neither has a crazy over-processed look. Maybe the star colours are a bit more realistic in the bottom one to my eyes? Lovely work. Barry
  22. EyeGuy
    Wow. That's some beautiful data. The final image is going to be a(nother) stunner. The little "blow-out"on the side stuck out to me too. I've never seen it before. Barry
  23. EyeGuy
    Thanks for that. Yes, APT's pointcraft is just superb. 10 pixel accuracy after automatic meridian flip is a thing of beauty. I think it would be flogging a dead horse on this particular image to bother changing the star colours, but I'm definitely going to come back to the Heart with the big TEC 180FL, and give it some proper treatment. I forgot to tighten down the focus lock properly when I started and half way through the run (which had crap transparency) the FWHM took a big jump. I included the frames anyway - I was just so happy plate solving was working. Oh well, you live and learn. Barry
  24. EyeGuy
    It was a Moravian G3 16200C OSC with an OPT Triad filter. The camera isn't a good match for that scope / FL and is fairly undersampled. When I bought it the extra complexity of NB filters seemed utterly daunting, but I feel like I'm ready to take the plunge now with a mono camera, especially if I get my observatory built this year as planned. 🙂 Barry
  25. EyeGuy
    Thanks - yeah the blue stars a bit annoying, but on the upside, it makes star sizes much less obtrusive. I ran it through photometric colour calibration in PI, but obviously it can't restore data that just isn't there. Barry
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue. By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.