Marvin Jenkins

I love a bit of real carbon fiber bling but I am with JeremyS on this, Wood.

I have an everlasting hankering for something Berleback and one day the dream will come true. Lovely bit of kit by the way.

Marv

I understand. The universe is a mind blowing place and I feel lucky as a beginner to be able to image a galaxy or a nebula and have almost instant viewing, via DSLR screen or laptop.

We are quite spoilt really, but that inner part in most of us always reaches to the summit and we see what the best are doing.

I only asked about targeted versus background as if this were serious, then Hubble (Space telescope) would have us all scratching our heads.

Marv

Super well done on the gravitationally lensed quasars though. Great job.

M

I was of the understanding via the post from the OP on April 24th that they meant the most distant object targeted.

I maybe wrong #whitfieldp and please correct me if I am, but your post said that your Astrobin image was of the ‘owl nebula‘.

Is your image targeting the QSO or is the QSO a background object? I wanted to know as the definition of targeted, and happens to be in the background is fundamental to the OPs question. 

I found the rest of your answer utterly fascinating although I have to confess a little above my pay grade. Although a lot of what you posted has me delving for more information.

Marvin

My meager contribution is 126mlys NGC 4388 in Markarians Chain.

In fairness I had no idea it was there initially but it is a galaxy with shape not a fuzzy blob.

I have attached my very first MC attempt and biro doodle of all the galaxies I could identify with distances.

Marv

Now I did think how can I blame my solid state comment on spell check but realised that my mistake from Solid State which should have been Steady State is actually a very funny gag.

I can see Fred Hoyle holding his head in his hands. Valve Universe, might be a breakthrough.

Laughing with you all,

Marv

Welcome friend. A good place to be.

Marv

I don’t believe a word of it! Solid state universe, zero expansion. Existence makes so much sense this way. Why complicate things with a Big Bang?

Just think how many problems could be solved if all the people trying to find dark matter looked for real stuff😁

Marv

Thank you to the two of you for replies. I apologies for quality of the pictures, in this day an age I have an iPhone6 to hand instead of an Olympus SLR, note not D. I must get get back to living with a camera at all times.

It was very noticeable as I was wearing polarising shades, and just happened look across the garden and thought ‘that is new, I must look that up’.

Astronomy has taught me to observe. I find that observational discipline has morphed into my everyday. I am happy to say my eyesight is extraordinary but I am mostly hearing impaired.

I can honestly say that I can spot Orchids by the roadside from my van as I pass by. 
 

Marv

Sun about 30 minutes from setting and I noticed a short non curved rainbow at the same elevation as the sun.

There was a high diffuse cirrus and a few small cumulus. I have never seen this before and having recently got into the subject of weather I looked it up in a couple of books.

The description for sun dog looks right but I would appreciate someone’s opinion who has past observations.

Marvin

What an emotive subject. What a difficult subject especially as we are on public domain social media.

The OP posted this April 28th. Three likes and two replies!

First off I will say that right now, things are delicate socially. When are they not? I do not know how far I can go with this (mods) but the title of this thread is a result of sexism in science historically.

I understand that back in the day men thought about women as inferior. Despite the times and restrictions placed on them they were amazing....because they they are not inferior.

I keep encountering observations from Mrs Burbage with regards to Quasars. And to think she only got time on the big scopes in America by saying she was her husbands assistant.

What a legacy.

Marvin

Just been out with the dogs up the lane to an elevated position and could clearly see Mercury naked eye.

It is sometimes a tricky object and counter intuitive as you are looking for a small bright object, low to the horizon in the brightest part of the sky. At the same time the brightest stars are not bright enough to show in the darkest part of the sky.

It took a couple of minutes to find it as the sky was so clear that there was no distant object to focus on. I find myself looking at the most distant horizon then switching to sky. I think of it as autofocus with a camera having nothing solid to rangefinder to.

The other odd thing is when you find it, you cannot understand why it was so hard to find in the first place. “Look at that really bright planet just there” and no one else can see it without holding fingers in the air and saying things like “three thumbs above the second to last telephone pole, after the water tower”

All gets a bit complicated.

Marv

59 minutes ago, Zermelo said:

I've found this to be a real help - set the slew speed to 1 or 2 and pan back and forth.  I've seen galaxies this way that I just couldn't see in a static view.

Bit like a longer powered version of tapping the scope to bring vibration, so the faint object becomes apparent. I maybe entirely wrong of course, feel free to say so if I have it wrong (quite probable).

Marv

1 minute ago, Astro Noodles said:

Those are beautiful images Marvin, especially the second one.

I accept what you are saying, that processing is at least 50% of the package. However, I am not yet at the stage where I have the image data to produce a nice image. Just practice and some clear nights should help.

Absolutely understand. We are at the mercy of the weather. You can only do what the clouds allow you to do. A huge measure of patience is needed in this game and I have no patience whatsoever!!!

Astro Noodles,

The other thing about Astro images, is that even thought the data set that was processed into those images were mine, from my back garden, using my 150pds, I find myself thinking it is not my picture.

I am indebted to the people who helped me ‘see’ what I had captured, but the effort was not all mine. Again it is part of the learning curve and if not for the restrictions I could have learned a lot more.

Marv

1 minute ago, ollypenrice said:

I stopped learning anything about image acquisition years ago. Processing, though, is a never ending... er... process!

lly

I haven’t even begun and I am dreading that part of the future. My wife says I am like Magneto, I walk up to a pc and it stops working.

I think I have a heavy metal skeleton as everyone says I am 11 stone when I am in fact near fifteen.

Not great when you love cycling! 

Marv

A prime example. But it comes with an explanation. This was first attempt at the Great Orion Nebula. I think it is about one hour of exposures without calibration frames. I stacked it in DSS and sent the tif to my friend who has Pixinsight.

At the time just using an intervalometer, and getting one hours data with ok PA was a real challenge. Bit like rubbing your stomach and tapping your head at the same time.

The important bit of this post is that although I had downloaded GIMP to my PC it was a complete mystery! I had literally no processing skills, the software was incomprehensible.

Friend with PI sent back the first picture and I thought he was pranking me. The second came from his family member with software skills.

It was then I realised that this whole AP thing is a package. You and I are very near the beginning but the mountain is there to be climbed. I hope to see you along the way.

Marv

Hi Astro Noodles

So much great information as read through this thread and a big thumbs up for the encouragement of beginners to post there first images. There may well be plenty of constructive criticism and I know it is like laying your efforts bare, but the best on ‘here’ may well have been no better.

Some of the posts in this thread are very close to my heart. You can see from my signature that I am at the beginning with equipment and the equipment also reflects the two years I have started doing a bit of AP.

I have had the great fortune to get to know an astronomer with a high level setup. It has been an eye opener to see the difference between what I can get from a data set using free software and what can be achieved using high end software, you get what you pay for I guess, and free is .......

Just like yourself I am very much on this journey, regardless of how many years it will take or if my equipment level can get better. But I will say that the images you take are yours.

Be proud of the fact that you have images of objects in space non Astro people do not even know exist. It is easy to look at the peak of the mountain but the experience does not mean you have to get right to the top.

Marvin

I couldn’t agree more with advice given, especially getting out and imaging multiple nights on the same object if possible. 
Most of us have jobs and family commitments so all night long sessions are normally out of the question.

I for one found my limiting factor being the cold weather 2 hr limit of my camera battery. As #rnobeleddy said, I was too eager as well so I would move onto another target instead of backing it up with more nights.

On the other hand, sometimes the weather was so bad there was simply no chance to get anymore data. The target simply became unviable due to time lost, hence my suggestion of circumpolar targets at first. At least if the skies are clear you know they are there.

Marvin

Technically no post person was involved but I didn’t know which section to put this gem like find. 
Cat charity shop for 2 euros. It is complete and unused. The map and book are so stiff I don’t think they have been opened. Still has the printed letter from Sir Patrick Moore.
On the plus plus side I didn’t have a manual planetarium.

Stellarium is a great free tool. I find that planning a session with it very helpful.

I found at the beginning (still there to some degree) choosing targets that are circumpolar like M81/M82 is a good thing as they visible all night, so are less critical for position.

As for how long to image nebula, longer the better, I am sure someone who knows way more than I will be along soon.

Marv

iPhone picture, sorry it is not better by t my 6S is terrible at the EP.

M

I feel a little under gunned! But it is the best I have and tonight the moon is amazing.

150 PDS on an NEQ5 and a box of plossles, nothing going wrong there.

Marv

2 hours ago, Maxim Usatov said:

Thanks, Marv. I am actually much slower - this was 2-3 hours per night, 4 nights. 🙂

Sorry, didn’t pick up on the ‘clear four nights’ bit. Even more thumbs up from me going four nights on the trot to a darker site. You deserve that entry in your diary and thank you for sharing.

M

What a great report, sounds like you had a great time. Seriously productive three hours, well done.👍

Marv