vineyard

I think the juxtaposition looks cool. You can imagine that as a backdrop in a sci-fi film or computer game. Just needs a well-positioned silhouette of a Ripley-style xenomorph Alien and the whole mood changes. If I had photoshop and could use layers I'd try that myself with some stencils from Reddit, but hopefully someone else can!

Hello, Finally had some clear skies here last night, so spent a v nice 2.5 hrs taking various EPs for a run. Some v interesting findings for me (different ppl have different eyes & scopes so I'm sure ppl will disagree with some of the below!). Firstly, a huge thank you to @heliumstarfor sending out his lovely 13T6 to try out. The backdrop to this was that I recently started using a supercharged BV by @denis0007dland enjoyed the immersiveness so much that it made me wonder what Naglers would be like with a BV. Anyway, the kit used was: TV102iis (both monocular and then also BV'd), EPs: 2xTV40mm plossls (one an old smoothie), 2xZeiss 10x/20 aspherics, 18.2mm & 13mm Delites, 13T6 & 12T2. I also during the night added an Astronomik UV/IR filter (and then also stuck on an old Lumicon O-III filter for some nebulae). Most of the viewing was on the Pleiades, & then M42, & then Castor. Most of the comparison was of the Delites to the Naglers. Here are my main findings: 1. As I'd noticed on prior occasions too, the plossls have massive ER and the exit pupil is such that the light polluted sky can appear grey at times. But they capture the stars clearly & sharply. A great finder EP! 2. The Zeiss EPs were the absolute stars of the night. Big ER although not as much as the Plossls (I'm going to add eyecups) - the combination of FOV, the sharpness across the field, & the transmission was stunning. Just wonderful EPs - I get what the fuss is about (and I'm v lucky to have sourced them from a microscope dealer who perhaps didn't realise what they're capable of!). I haven't had a chance to try them on the moon yet with this BV, but I. really. cannot. wait. If you're thinking about them, definitely take them for a spin although from what I can tell from Google you need to be careful w provenance (Denis also cautions on that). 3. The 13T6 vs the 12T2. The T6 probably wins on balance - its smaller & lighter, with bigger lens surface (making it seem easier to look through). But the old T2 actually still has a v nice feeling to it - you have to get stuck in and swivel the eyes around and wherever you look there are stars. It also felt darker than the T6. (I will probably still end up parting with it as it can't really be BV'd, although I'm not yet sure about that decision - sentimentality...). 4. The DTs vs the 13T6. This was probably the most interesting comparison for me. Long story short: I actually ended up preferring the DTs, and in particular I think the EP that nails the 13T6 is the 18.2DT. On a focal head-to-head between the 13T6 vs 13DT, the T6 probably shades it b/c of the FOV. But w both DTs I found that the focus had a cleaner snap & thus easier to find than the T6. The stars also seemed sharper & almost larger (!) in the DTs, and the sky darker (although in fairness the T6 was v v close) - others will know better than me whether that's b/c of different transmission or different contrast. The DTs definitely seemed sharper right across to the edge of the field - stars remaining pinpoint right up to the moment they disappeared. Whereas with the T6, there distinctly seemed to be some v slight tails on the stars right at the very edge of the field (I kept checking on this) - has anyone else noticed anything like this? At various times I had both 13s in the BV so that I could compare instantaneously, and then also had the 13T6 and the 18.2DT in at the same time. That's when I was most pleasantly surprised by the 18.2DT. It had the same FOV as the 13T6 (actually slightly larger), which together with the better snap, contrast & sharpness, actually made it a better EP for me. Comfort wise, the DTs were v comfortable - the cup mechanism is better than the old Radian instajust, and for extended viewing I could already tell that the DTs would be more comfortable than the T6s. (The shorter ER on the T6 doesn't bother me - it's more that to get the FOV in the T6 you have to reach with your eyeball a bit more in a given direction whereas for example the 18.2DT presented the same FOV more comfortably). Yes the magnification on the 13T6 was more than that with the 18.2DT (68x vs 48x on my scope) but tbh that didn't make a huge difference to me. So I wonder whether the 18.2DT actually nails the 13T6. It's a v v good EP. Don't get me wrong, the 13T6 is still an amazing EP - but I think it gets hit in a pincer attack by the DTs. For the FOV the 18.2DT wins, and if you want the same magnification the 13DT delivers that better snap, contrast & pinpoint sharpness, with a better sense of zeroing in on what you want to examine more closely. Splitting Castor was restfully easy. I started the night hoping the 13T6 was going to blow me away, and excited about using it in a BV. And it really is a v good EP - I can see why it must have been so exciting when it first came out. But in all fairness I'm having to rethink my own particular configuration based on how well the DT tag team seemed to work. I haven't tried Delos or Ethos so can't compare those - but those are all heavier EPs (and beyond budget) too. For the shorter focal lengths, my aim is to somehow compare 7DT vs 9DT - to see whether it's worth getting dedicated EPs or whether 2.5x powermates may be the best thing to go for in the soon-to-conclude Televue sale Anyway, this has gone on far too long. I'm still v much a newbie so I'm sure I'm overlooking important considerations or use cases! And thank you again @heliumstar for the test-run (& @denis0007dlfor the BV). Happy Christmas all, Vin

Hello, Has anyone had a chance to use the Starizona Evo-FF field flattener for the EvoGuide50ED? If so, would be curious for your thoughts & reviews on how well it works (and any sample images you've taken) pls? Cheers, Vin

Wow that is insane, Rusted. And ever so slightly hypnotic.

Thanks both & especially for the detailed feedback vlaiv, much appreciated b/c it's exactly the type of advice I was hoping for. I wasn't even aware it was shot in 8 bit, so now I know to be vigilant on that. That's strange re the different software b/c I actually used the same software (the photo module of EKOS) and am fairly certain (as far as I can remember) left gain & offset unchanged. I used SiriL for the processing & stacking. I did register the lights in SiriL before stacking (b/c I knew the stars had shifted) but I didn't register the darks & biases before stacking them to make masters. So I wonder if the reason SiriL is tagged on the lights (and doesn't show the gain) but not the others is because of that additional bit of file manipulation the software did? I can't remember the offset setting. Another lesson here: I'll probably keep a little journal of these settings so that I can see in the future. Yes those were 20 sec lights, and agreed re the tracking being poor. I only did a very rough alignment so I was expecting that (wanted to see how tolerant it is of user-error). Also the scope was unbalanced and one of the motor belts can probably be replaced with something tighter (I think one belt slipped a cog a couple of times while slewing). This was all just a first run of modified kit to see what the highest priority areas to start working on are - and this feedback has been v helpful for that - thank you! Now just to wait for some clear skies to put into practice some of these changes 🧐 Cheers again, Vin

Wow - that's like being in orbit around the moon! 😮👏🏽

Hi Vlaiv, oops sorry. The camera was ASI178MC (uncooled). 20 lights of 20 secs each (w UHC-S filter in). Similarly 20 each of darks & biases (but no flats). It wasn't a proper imaging session (I was testing tracking) so I know there won't be huge data on the files, but I'm curious to see if I'm making some basic newbie errors & leaving info that could still be extracted just hanging there in the dark. The fits files (for lights, darks & biases) are here. Thinking a bit more I wonder if the "frame" on the right & bottom is from the tracking error. I wasn't using guiding & hadn't done a super-accurate alignment and so the star that's an inch down from the top right corner was in the frame when the first light was taken but had slipped off by the 20th. And so as the images get registered (if I'm using that term correctly) maybe there are only a few images of that border area, hence that seems darker as its undercaptured compared to the rest of the picture? I don't know whether the haziness in the rest of the picture is clouds or b/c I didn't do flats though. Cheers!

After some v helpful tips from Rusted & Gina on an image I posted in another thread (incl a pointer towards GIMP and an example of what is possible in ImPPG) here's my first GIMP tinkering on the moon. Still not as sharp or clear as Rusted's workings w ImPPG but so much better than the original. Cheers (PS - when I zoom in I see lots of little black dots - I'm guessing that'll be something on the imaging rather than a processing artefact, in which case had I taken flats they would disappear?)

Hello, so I restacked the original subs using master darks & biases that I had stacked themselves from 20 each (the original ones only used 1 random dark & bias). And then I've played around on GIMP (never having used it before, Gina tipped me towards this as an open-source Mac friendly package to try) and so far this is where I get. If I tilt the laptop screen, from some angles, the backgorund sky looks slightly greyish? Is that high cloud (and the moonlight), or is it because I didn't take flats - and any reason why the grey is only on a smaller rectangle within the overall image? Thank you! Vin

That starless image is Wagnerian. Wow.

Oops true, apologies Peter. Yes you're right about the moon. I just wanted to play with the kit initially to see if I could get the tracking working (the subs were a happy conclusion to the evening). The kit is 102mm f/8.6 refractor, on a Vixen GP2 that I've modded with motors from EQStar EQ5 in Ukraine. I can't do polar alignment b/c Polaris is behind a tall building, so I did a rough orientation w compass & latitude setting, and then calibrated using the moon. Once the moon was centred, I parked the scope & reset that as home, and came back 2 hrs later, unparked it, and told it to go to the moon, and it found it again perfectly. It was my first time using EKOS & the tracking so that was the main objective of the evening. Told EKOS to go to the Pleiades - the astrometry module was amazing - it snapped the photo, did the matching and came back with the identification of Maia. So then I thought I'd take some subs to practice the focusing & photo modules on EKOS. And I was v pleased with how smoothly it seemed to go (don't have a motorised focuser so used the HFR graphs on EKOS). No guiding, just tracking using the motors & EKOS. Not bad tracking tbh - I could tell some slippage was happening (1 star that was on the first sub disappeared by the time of the 20th sub, I'm hoping a guidescope would improve that). The scope was probably slightly unbalanced, and also since I'd only calibrated it with the moon 2 hrs ago I guess that's also inevitable? I'm going to rummage with those Pleaides subs on Pixinsight given what Rusted managed to do with some moon subs I took earlier in the evening! Cheers, Vin

Hello, I took my first ever subs of a DSO tonight. 20 subs of 20sec each of Maia in the Pleiades (taken with a UHC-S L booster filter - it's probably the totally wrong filter to have used tonight but I was just playing around with it!). Stacked in SiriL. Two files attached. The first was the stacked image saved as a TIFF and then played around with in Lightroom. The second was the stacked image manipulated a bit in SiriL first (adjusting the histogram) and then saved as TIFF and then played around with (less so) in Lightroom. The second image has more "info" (ie fainter stars) which never showed up in the first one. All tips welcome & gratefully received (whether processing or original capture or anything else!). (I have the TIFF files or the original stacked FITS files too if anyone wants to break them open). Cheers all, Vin

Stunning photos. 👏🏾 Very interesting about the minerals. That second photo would make a great science fiction novel cover (or something out of Star Wars).

Wow - lovely photos ESPECIALLY given where you took them from. 👏🏾 May I ask whether you used any filters (and if so which ones)? Cheers.

Beautiful 👏🏾 You could probably sell prints of the first one!

Ah clever, thanks (I am a complete AP newbie!). Cheers.

Thanks for sharing this. I was actually going to post a Q asking folks for their recommendations on which light pollution filters are best (initially primarily for visual for me) - especially wrt the IDAS D2. From a purely aesthetic purpose, I think the Optolong 400s (3rd image) is the nicest for my eyes. Cheers.

Hello, I took some shots of the Sun on Monday morning. Lunt 50, ASI178MC. I noticed some strange things - I suspect it means that there's a stain on my camera, but I thought I would check. Two photos below - the raw PNG files turned into JPG (no manipulation or reorientation at all) - taken in chronological order. The first taken at 1151, the second at 1153. All settings identical between the photos. "Up" is SSW in these photos so as the Sun moves across the sky, it moves towards the top left corner of the screenshot. Those patches on the surface cannot possibly be solar features b/c the sun surely cannot be rotating that fast (also their relative orientation would change between the patch near the solar pole and the solar equator). Also those patches were not there on white light viewing w a separate visual scope. So I suspect somehow my camera has some stains on it that need cleaning. ASI's website suggests ethanol and Q-tips. I'm guessing methanol would also be ok? And that acetone or toluene (like cotol 240) would be v bad ideas? (The reason for asking the latter is that I know cotol is used to clean surfaces before the application of glues etc - but I suspect it would also strip any coatings on the optics?). Thank you! Vin

Single shot (haven't figured out stacking yet). A little bit of tweaking in Lightroom. ASI178MC & a 102mm refractor. Heading back out now for visual only. Cheers! EDIT: that didn't take long - back inside, those friendly clouds have returned. Oh well.

Hello, I have to say Stu you have made me chuckle at my own stupidity! No offence taken at all - in fact thank you (and to John for the drawing) for the gentle corrections. I just remembered it all as Orion's Nebula from my teens (and that it had lots of distinctive features). I must admit I had to google Flame & Horsehead (as proper nouns) when the names came up earlier in this message trail, and on wikipedia this in the image gallery pinged well with the shape and relative orientation of what I saw (obviously not with that level of fine detail, but the shape & orientation of three distinctive regions marked up on the attached jpg). And I just thought oh, ok those must have been the Flame & Horsehead regions then.😂 Now on further research I see that crikey that region is awash with smaller sub-regions! And that of course M42 & M43 also have similar shaped regions. So, based on John's drawing I guess it must have been M43, the FIsh's Mouth & the Sword! Thanks for the corrections. Hopefully it stays clear tonight so I will head out again and have a look see - if this time I come back with Flame & Horsehead then it must be the absinthe. Cheers both! Vin (PS - that wikipedia photo of the proper Flame & Horsehead is pretty good going with a C6 though isn't it!) (PPS - I'm changing the title of this thread too! 🤣)

Hi Lee, I couldn't claim to have seen it as spectacularly as the photos show it! I found the O-III made the nebulae stand out more. So what visually was at first just a blur in the EP (the flame) could be seen to stretch for wider, and then almost like a tail extends away (towards where the horsehead is I guess). I couldn't spend enough time to get properly dark adjusted to let details come out (also everytime you look up from the EP the local light pollution just kills you). You could tell there was a bump along the tail where I guess the horseshead would be. I just liked seeing the whole thing - the O-III really made a big difference so I reckon with an 8" you should have a cracking chance (although will defer to others far more experienced than me). Made me wish I had a mono camera setup with filters - something for the distant future though. Cheers!

I completely lost track of how good the skies were last night until just checking SGL late at night to see multiple reports of people playing (thank you!). A quick setup with an old Vixen 102mm SP achromat I just bought, to test it (and some EPs that came with it) out. For an old lady, her optics were still brilliant. She'd come with the green manually driven eq mount on alu tripod (so definitely undermounted - wooden legs needed). The new old-EPs put through the works were a TV 40mm smoothie, 20mm Circle T erfle and 12mm Nag T2 (along with a 15mm Delite & 4mm Radian I already had for comp). I also figured I'd test some filters (Baader Neodymium, Baader UHC L-booster, and an old Lumicon O-III). A really wonderful stint of viewing. My wife joined, and we started with the Pleiades, hopped across to Betelgeuse, before eventually ending up with the horsehead. The scope disappeared looking at the Pleiades, the tripod didn't. It was really nice star-hopping around, like on a space-walk. My wife actually liked the TV40mm the most - both for its wider FOV and eye-relief (she uses glasses) - the closer in magnification didn't do much for her. The 4mm was just too much magnification on Betelgeuse (especially on such an undermounted setup). This was my first time with a Nagler and boy do you need to re-weight things. I was most uncertain about the eye-relief, but actually it wasn't a problem at all (quite comfortable in fact) so now I know I can go down to 11mm ER . Once tweaked, I can see what the attraction of the Naglers is - the FOV with the magnification. The Baader neodymium didn't seem to make a massive difference to the viewing (but we have lots of LED street lamps in our area now so is that it?). The UHC L-booster did make the background sky darker so I want to definitely spend more time with that on a proper mount with my normal 4". The O-III w the Nagler on the horses head was just the best way to end the night. The whole thing in one FOV with the wispiness spreading against the black black background. I'm just getting back into astronomy, and the last time I properly looked at this nebula was in my teens with 10x50 binos - ie, a v different view! It was just wonderful - I could have spent a lot longer out there. Takeaways for me: the 4mm Radian goes, a 24mm Panoptic and wider-than-Delite FOVs (Delos, new Naglers) are to be researched more, and perhaps a filter wheel since living in heavily LP skies in a city, proper filters make a huge difference even for visual? Clear skies all!

I can't speak to TV32mm but for the TV40mm plossl yes based on last night's viewing. My wife (who wears glasses, loves the stars but is not an optics geek) looked through a TV40 for the first time (no "how-to" tips etc) and then later through a 20mm Erfle, 15mm Delite, 12mm Nagler. She loved the wider views of the plossl a lot more (ie, the EP disappeared for her, which I suppose is it doing its job!). I think a Panoptic is on the horizon...

Thanks Rusted, much appreciated. Completely agree - I'm a big believer in learning by doing, and also I think what the Japanese call Kaizen. The idea that there is no such thing as perfection, and all you can do is improve (and if its not an improvement then don't do it) particularly resonates. I find it's also a great get out of jail card at home (although I think I've been rumbled on that by now as well 🤣). Re competitiveness, I've resolved that the moment I become competitive about them is the moment I put my gear away. One of the many things I love about them is the sense of perspective they bring... Anyway, hope you get lots of clear sunny days this winter (I'm told that meteorological autumn is now over). Cheers!

Thank you both. You've rumbled me Dave, I forgot to shift the photos! The iPhone photo should be reflected in the vertical axis. And the whole disc should be rotated about 135 deg (so that the prominence is about 1030/11 oclock) - I forgot that the way my camera screwed on to the diagonal, its "up" was actually pointing SSW so the image is also in that orientation 😂 or maybe we have really rare upside down trees in our neighbourhood 🧐 Cheers!