Jump to content

sgl_imaging_challenge_banner_31.thumb.jpg.b7a41d6a0fa4e315f57ea3e240acf140.jpg

5haan_A

Members
  • Content Count

    132
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

76 Excellent

About 5haan_A

  • Rank
    Star Forming

Profile Information

  • Location
    Yorkshire

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Speaking of which attached is a single stacked frame of Oiii data. There are 46x10 min subs in there with all the dark and dark flats necessary. Nearly 8 hours of capture time on a eq6 mount through a Esprit 100. I know the Cave Nebula is a hard target but I feel that I may have been overly ambitious thinking I could capture the required nebulosity while the target was relatively low on the horizon and there being a fullish moon. Can anyone squeeze any juice out of this one, or am I flogging a dead horse. Best, Autosave002.tif
  2. Yeah I think knowing the limitations of your data is an important point. Having just got started on the O stack I can safely say that for this particular target, given my set up and that the majority of imaging time was done under a fairly full moon no amount of stretching is going to bring out the type of detail I desire. Shame as I have 8 or so hours of what now seems to be fairly impotent O data. Best,
  3. Hi Guys, The answer seems obvious, well it is to be fair- stretch until you have enough detail from nebulosity and stop when it gets too noisy. But, is there a more methodical/scientific approach to this. I use DSS and photoshop, the autosaved stacked file out of DSS is always very dark so a lot of stretching ensues. On my most recent project, C9 cave nebula, I have found stretching to be a real fine line because I need to stretch a lot to draw out the detail, but when I start to stretch too much I begin to lose the contrast between the lovely dark areas of the image, and then there's the
  4. I think this was what my problem is. The size I printed was A3 size which explains why the quality of the print was so poor. I think this is a really important thing to think about because I do want to print bigger in the future. What would be good on my part is to get a good understanding of how I can create big pictures. As Vlaiv said the size of my image is 2500x2000 at 300 dpi that translates to 21.16cm x 17cm. How would I go about doubling or tripling the size of my image without sacrificing a massive amount of quality? I do think A3 is a good size for a print, A4 at a min
  5. Hi thanks for that. I will have a look at them for sure. Sadly for this particular image I have to use Snapfish as they gave me credit rather than a full cash refund. Funnily enough I do know that Snapfish can produce good quality images sometimes as they have done some for me in the past it's seems to be a problem with this particular image. Best,
  6. Hi Guys, So I recently tried to print out one of my images to give as a gift to some friends and family using snapfish, a UK based printing company. On the first attempt that they tried I was very unimpressed with the resolution and print quality. They gave me a refund, but I am now looking to see what I can do to improve the image quality. I feel like something somewhere has gone wrong in the way that I have processed, scaled or sized the image. I am not too sure. I use photoshop and usually when everything is viewed digitally compression and quality doesn't matter as much compared to pr
  7. Im looking forward to it, also I just had another look at that sub and I do believe there is something to be said for black and white images. Cheers mate. I will look into this for sure. I have been looking into an OAG and it is starting to make more and more sense to me. Still though you can see from the 10 minute sub that the guiding is not bad as it is for the moment. We will see if any flexure or other issues start cropping up.
  8. So the clouds finally passed last night which gave me a chance to finally test out my new scope. It has been almost a month since I bought this scope. The weather has been partly to blame for the long delay in getting a first light, and also a lot of the additional accessories have taken a while to come. For example, this scope was ordered brand new, and it didn't come with a focuser. Apparently the focuser that initially came supplied was pretty rubbish so the manufacturer thought to get rid otherwise it might detract from what is otherwise a nice product. Once some of the accessories came it
  9. Hasta la vista Green i think. Thats the one I have anyway. Thanks for the comments guys I'm really pleased with how this turned out. I feel like I'm progressing in terms of what I know now and can do. This type of image 2 years ago was so far away from my capabilities.
  10. Hi, A couple of months back I drove down to Spain from the UK, with rig boxed up in the boot ofc. My mount packed in half way through the trip, so it was a real bummer, but I did manage to have a fairly good go at imaging the lagoon nebula. For me it was the first time properly using my new ZWO 1600 pro and a narrowband filter set. I have to say I am really pleased with the results that one can get. The image was taken through an Esprit 100, mounted on an EQ6 pro. The camera used was a ZWO 1600 pro. 12 x 600 seconds H 12 x 600 seconds O 10 x 600 seconds S
  11. Nice, just placed an order. Soon to be a member of the RC club. What swayed me in the end was the FOV, the fact I won't have to worry about mirror flop and that NASA used an RC design for the hubble telescope. Now its time to add on the various accessories, which will no doubt come to near abouts what I paid for the scope. Best,
  12. Lovely that's pretty much the FOV that I am looking for. How do you find collimating the RC is there an easy method? I know what you mean about accessories, the good thing is that by going for this scope I do have more budget left to invest in the right accessories. Thanks,
  13. Lots to think about! Thanks Vlaiv for the explanation it was insightful enough for me to come to some initial conclusions. Firstly that I am not going to go for a massively long focal length just for the sake of it. Secondly that I will bin, I had never considered binning and always kind of viewed it as something that people do when they are in a rush, but it makes a lot of sense especially when trying to reduce the amount of sampling. Also thanks for the guys giving me their thoughts on SCTs, the celestron edge was a real front runner in my list but after the comments from you gu
  14. This is something to definitely consider, and also frustrating as I have only recently switched to a ZWO 1600 thinking that it would fit for most of what I want to do for now. Is there a more suited camera for longer focal lengths? The Explore scientific was high on my list, any suggestions on a RC OTA? This scope was on my radar as well, perhaps something to consider? https://www.365astronomy.com/sharpstar-20032pnt-200mm-super-fast-f-3.2-paraboloid-newtonian-reflector-telescope-red.html It does have a built in reducer that brings the focal length down to 640. Al
×
×
  • 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.