Jump to content

Narrowband

B4silio

Members
  • Posts

    58
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Reputation

155 Excellent

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    Zurich, Switzerland

Recent Profile Visitors

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

  1. Ooooh fantastic! And also Thanks for proposing a Linux option! (Have only used Ekos on mac but it's high time that I tried it on linux)
  2. Hi! I've been doing my polar alignment with drift alignment for years, dedicating the necessary number of hours to get something really good, until I recently got an ASIAIR plus, which comes with a nifty module for polar alignment using plate solving. I was awed by how quickly I was able to get a fantastic alignment, making it possible to do 3 minutes unguided subs after 5 minutes of alignment (compared to the 40+ minutes I'd have to spend using drift alignment). What I particularly like of the setup is that it uses my main scope for imaging, which I guess means that in theory I could get very accurate alignment if I spent more time on it. (My seeing makes the point moot since there's no reason to shoot more than ~5 minutes images on my Bortle 6-7 sky). SharpCap Pro does the same (although the interface is not as user-friendly). So I was wondering: what free software (or software combinations) would allow to do the same alignment without having to use ASIAIR or SharpCapPro? Note: for polar drift alignment I've been using PHD2, and I've used PlateSolve2 for plate solving and synching within CCDCiel, but I haven't found a "Polar align with plate solving" solution in the couple of software I've actually tried. Any suggestions? (thanks and have a lovely day!) p.s. For reference, what ASIAIR does is : take a first image at home position and plate solve, rotate around the RA axis by about 90 degrees and take another image and plate solve. The error between what the 90 deg rotation should bring you to if the mount were properly aligned and where you actually end up is calculated and displayed, then you enter a cycle of --> adjust mount --> snapshot+solve --> adjust again --> snapshot+solve ... until the computed error is low enough. The cherry on the cake is the "auto refresh" mode in which it continuously takes snapshots so you just keep correcting until you're done without having to manually interact with the software again.
  3. IC 443 – The Jellyfish Nebula 32h of SHO data, had to drop about 10h of it due to bad focus and me forgetting to turn on the anti-dew band T_T. 6h of 300' Ha images (Antlia Pro 3nm) 10h of 300' O3 images (Antlia Pro 3nm) 6h of 300' S2 images (Antlia Pro 3nm) Scope: Esprit 100ed + Flattener Camera : ZWO ASI2600MM-Pro Mount: HEQ 6 Pro Dates : 27.01 - 05.02 Stacking in APP, Deconvolution and Stretching in PI, Color-mixing and post-processing in PS. Stars are rendered in HOO, background is SHO
  4. Wow, indeed quite the improvement! I have to say that the old version looks already pretty nice : the deconvolution seems to be making the biggest difference, but in terms of nuances, colors and noise it was already a pretty good result!
  5. yeah that's because I'd already layered out the 3 channels for color combination (the name of the doc was indeed misleading). Nevertheless, your comment did end up getting me to the solution, so thanks again!
  6. Thx for the question, they're grayscale! However you pointed me in the right direction! Switching the color profile from default to sGray (the mono equivalent to the sRGB ICC profile), the image displays very close to what I have in pixinsight! I didn't think about it since I don't usually manage ICC profiles on grayscale images, but it definitely makes a difference! Thank you!
  7. Hi! In my workflow for narrowband images I do my first processing with pixinsight (Stacking > Deconvolution > Stretching) and then move to phtoshop for Luminance Matching, color combination and post-processing. I'm pretty happy with the results I get, but I'm always bummed by an issue I get when switching from PI to PS : The image I export from PI (Tiff, 16bit) appears darker in PI than when I open it up on Photoshop (the image below is a side-by-side screenshot of the exported image re-opened in both software). This means that if I do a stretching that looks good to me in PI, it will be an overbrightened mess when opened in photoshop. I've learned to guesstimate how dark I need to make my stretch in PI so that it will appear ok in photoshop (and then I take it from there with CameraRaw), but this means that spending time with something like GHS is rather fruitless because the final image I open in Photoshop will look nothing like what I might have spent a while fine-tuning in PI. Is my PI somehow displaying the image incorrectly? Or is photoshop reading the exported tiff badly? I work extensively on PS for my daily job and use a calibrated monitor so I trust implicitly what PS is showing me. But I imagine it might be something iffy in the export + import process? Any ideas are welcome!
  8. Wow the difference is more than striking! Hooray for always better processing! What did you use specifically to get the nebulosity to feel so much more solid and still keep the color nuances in the brightest blue vs white areas?
  9. Wow, such a beautiful and nuanced image! The horsehead nebula is ubiquitous, but it so easily ends up being a saturated or over-sharpened/over-contrasted mess. Your image is so delicate in its balance of shades and nuances, extremely clean, with splendid stars. (There's a very tiny bit of burning on Sigma Orionis, but it's details and I'm sure you'll iron it out when you process it more completely). And also congrats for making your setup on the move work out so well!
  10. Wow! Love the details on this, but the mosaic is downright incredible! Definitely the most beautiful shot of the Orion constellation as a whole I've ever seen! Congratz to you and everyone involved for such a beautiful effort and result!
  11. Fantastic! I love how you were able to capture the shaded filaments surrounding the center. I have the nagging suspicion that you could get more detail out of the nebulosity and dust (your stars are so clean that it feels the data you have should let you do a lot!), but regardless, I love the framing and composition and tone of the image!
  12. Nom de bleu que c'est beau! Fantastic work, and surprisingly little integration time overall (~60h all told?) That F2 is definitely doing its work!
  13. I had the exact same feeling : my O3 stand to gain the most from good quality, whereas getting better Ha feels like it's easier with relatively little time investment. But then again it's true that Luminance tends to come from Ha so getting smaller stars and better detail will pay off on the overall image quality.
  14. Oh thought it was still in my signature! TS 8" RC ASI2600MM-Pro HEQ6
  15. Managed to do a couple of nights on this nice and bright object from my garden in the city (Bortle-5/6) I'd like to come back to it to get a lot more integration time but for now that's what I have managed to do! 13h of 3-min images in SHO (HOO used for stars) (stacking in APP, stretching & deconvolution in PI, color compositing and corrections in PS)
×
×
  • 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.