Rustang

1 minute ago, vlaiv said:

Indeed it looks a bit better.

Same region as before - but I did apply a bit of noise reduction this time.

I think it is mix of both - faint target and some setting in DSS.

So going forward then, what ever the target, just use Average!?

18 minutes ago, vlaiv said:

Yes, I'd like to rule out any strange setting in DSS that might cause problems (like setting rejection too high so you end up with just one or few stacked subs and similar) - but Veil is really faint and delicate structure. Not much signal there and signal that is there is rather faint - or rather "in strands / filaments" not in bulk so you can clearly display it in image.

Average does seem better!

AveragetestStack.TIF

8 minutes ago, vlaiv said:

If you are concerned with stacking parameters - try setting everything to simple average (no rejection, don't use median - put everything on average) - and see how much improvement there is.

In the end - it could be that nebulosity is faint and you need more integration time - but I'd check with above average approach, just to make sure.

Ok, il give that ago, from what Ive said above then do you think its just either integration time or some settings in DSS nothing else of concern?

This is what I mean above - the noise issue is still present in my NGC7000 stack with a little stretching! Look at the darker areas, they are even worse! yet the nebulosity is fine!!!?? Ive been putting up with it pretty much since using the camera as i kinda end up losing the noise but now with an image with so much sky its reallt not good so would be good to understand where the issue is coming from? Camera? intergaration time? camera settings? stacking issues? etc etc

Its 2hrs 40mins worth so not long but not short! I have tried different stacking parameters and it makes no difference! I'm guessing that's the data worthless then!? Ive sort of noticed in other images that dark areas (sky) are noisy-er but this gets hidden better in processing on nebulas with lots of nebulosity such as the last image of NGC7000 so maybe because there isant much nebulosity and more dark sky the noise issue is showing up alot more than usual with more! I wounder if its just how it is with the camera or something else then!?

5 minutes ago, vlaiv said:

Not sure if I understand.

Can you post linear data in 32bit FITS format for inspection? Don't apply any curve changes from DSS to it.

So the above crop was from the 32 bit stack simply opened in photoshop and this is what it looks like, no processing what so ever! Stack attached

ShortWestVeilHaStack.TIF

37 minutes ago, vlaiv said:

What exactly is bothering you about that image?

I can see few things that I consider bad in image:

1. Image is over sampled, stars are not pin points, but rather "balls" of light

2. There is black point clipping evident - there is no smooth transition between faint regions and background but rather steep one. Data has been pushed more than it can handle and histogram has been clipped

3. Noise grain is too large - that is just consequence of DSS and the way it aligns subs - it uses bilinear interpolation. If you want to get better looking background noise (finer grain) - use Siril and Lanczos interpolation for frame alignment

I havent done anything to it Viaiv, this is just the Stack straight out of DSS no processing what so ever and my issue is why is the Stack so bad to start with!?

6 minutes ago, Stuf1978 said:

Nicely done, great image

 

Thanks mate 👍

I captured some Ha on the western veil last night and my stack straight out of DSS isant great and I havent changed any settings! Below is a crop to show the issue/noise!? Any ideas? my subs dont look that bad!

QHY 9 mono CCD

Very nice 👏👏

22 minutes ago, peter shah said:

lovely and crisp with a super natural look to it...love your process on this

Thanks Peter 😊

I decided to aim for a nice and high target this time, it also helps being a brighter target too so a better choice while we are in non astro dark skies at the moment.

Captured over 3 nights this week - Ha = 4hrs 10 mins and OIII 2hrs 50mins.

4 minutes ago, vlaiv said:

No, listed weight means just scope and other bits - no counter weights. CWs are not counted towards total.

You can put approximately 15Kg and get decent results from HEQ5 - but you'll need 3 x 5Kg counter weights.

For example - 8" F/6 ota from Skywatcher DOB + 60mm guide scope from TS balanced by x2 white and one black 5Kg counter weight :D:

Or, in another words, yes Heq5 is capable of carrying 100mm class refractor and 8" guide scope weighing at about 8.5Kg balanced with only 2x5Kg:

 

Ok cool, I didn't think it took into account the counter weights but I've never been 100 % sure. I appreciate the advice as always 👍

1 hour ago, vlaiv said:

I think it will be more than fine.

I'm happily using Heq5 for imaging with ~12Kg on it and it performs very well (it is belt modded and tuned mount though).

Just a thought, does the mount weight capabilities include the counter weights because if I need both 5kg counter weights to balance the Esprit that's a total of 19.1 kg!? 

Yeah Ive just weighed the camera-filterwheel-reducer and togther they weigh 1.4kg, the guide cam and scope isant going to weigh anymore so thats approx 2.8kg added to 6.3 = 9.1kg

1 hour ago, Budgie1 said:

On paper, the Esprit 100 is 6.3kg and the HEQ5 is rated at 11kg for imaging, so you've got 4.7kg to play with.  

How did Carol get on with it on the HEQ5 in her advert photo?

We have had a chat through PM and can't decide if it's going to be on its limit. It has been fine for her but I've got added weight I think which is mostly the Altair 60mm guide scope, I'm going to weigh my camera and filter wheel etc shortly and go from there. I couldn't find confirmation on the weight of the Esprit if it includes the rings and dovetail!? 

I have raised interest with Carol in regards to the sale of her Esprit 100, I have seen others using this scope on a HEQ5 pro mount but just wanted to check that along with my QHY 9 Mono CCD camera, 7 position filter wheel, Altair 60mm guide scope and ASI120 guide camera that its not going to be to much of a stretch for my mount!? while I'm considering a mount upgrade down the line, its not necessity something I want to do right now.

24 minutes ago, Adreneline said:

Sorry. FWHM as I understand it is a measure of how well focussed you are. The lower the better. I think SharpCap focus aid uses FWHM and I know BackYardEoS has a FWHM focus aid built in - and maybe APT?

Apologies.

Adrian

Don't be silly, you weren't to know I've still got much to learn! 😊 Hopefully APT does as that's what I use so will look into it! 👍

1 minute ago, Adreneline said:

Thank you.

Well I am being picky. I noticed when I did the Star Analyse in Astro Pixel Processor it gave me fwhm figures of around 3.0 +/- 0.5 or so. I am pretty certain I can do better than that and get fwhm figures more like 2.0 +/- 0.25; in fact I generally get below 2.0 when imaging with the Samyang and ASI1600 in the past. When I looked at the BM diffraction pattern I did wonder if I had really nailed the intersection of all three lines but it was very close and so I left it cos' there wasn't much nautical darkness left to image. I rushed it a bit and rushing is never good  

HTH

Adrian

So yeah that mostly went over my head lol 🤣 I know nothing about fwhm figures so more to learn. Il stick with my basic diffraction spikes for now! 😊

1 hour ago, Adreneline said:

Thank you - it turned out better than I expected - just wish I'd really nailed the focus.

Thank you Peter. Had a spot of bother negating the amp glow at first so I re-took the darks (60 of them) and second time round it seems to have worked well - which is a relief! If I could get some OIII of the same quality I'd be a very happy chappy  

Just wondering for my own improvement purposes what you look our for in regards to perfect/imperfect focus as with my eyes its looks ok and very nice by the way! 😊

6 minutes ago, Adreneline said:

The first one gets my vote - I really like dusty brown nebula. Very nice.  

Adrian

First is my favourite too, the second was going for something new and still has something I like about it 🙂

So after getting some help on another thread in regards to my imaging/processing, here are two new processed versions of my HOO NGC7822 data that I'm much happier with. I havent sharpened or reduced the noise in the images as I wanted to allow the extra little bit of detail and natural sharpness to show through. I think I'm much happier with the subtly in colour also.

So this thread has gone on for a little while but its definitely been helpful for a few reasons so thanks everyone. I'm comfortable with the fact my images arnt perfect, there are lots of factors that mean this is so but with all that being said I'm really pleased with the progression Ive made in this hobby with the new camera and Ive been amazed with what Narrowband imaging has opened up. So with help from all the above, here are two new processed versions of my HOO NGC7822 data that I'm much happier with. Ive not sharpened the images and I also haven't removed much of the noise either because I wanted to allow for the extra little bit of sharpness and details to show.

30 minutes ago, wimvb said:

In the end, deconvolution didn't make much difference.

Btw, here's your star profile in the unstretched image. It's a bit wider and softer than what I'm used to. It looks oversampled, but with a SW 80ED and 5.4 um pixels it shouldn't be this soft, imo. I always thought that RA oscillation in PHD was a measure of seeing, but I never really looked further into it.

Thanks for having ago and for all your help. If the RA OSC is seeing then it could well be the brighter nights causing it its just strange how all of a sudden its not the reading it used to be but has only gone down since starting on this target during the 'non astro dark' nights. Il keep an eye on focus next time I'm imaging.

50 minutes ago, ollypenrice said:

I agree, I think focus may have been a little soft. I think the hardness in Rustang's image may be from global sharpening?

Olly

If you mean the images above where I was trying out the local constrat preset, I was only having a quick go to see what it could do so didn't worry about the stars while processing 😊