raf2020

Object: The Eagle Nebula with Pillars of Creation (catalogued as Messier 16 or M16, and as NGC 6611) Date: 17.07.2021, Light frames: ~00:50AM - 02:50AM and 18.07.2021, Light frames: ~00:30AM - 02:45AM ISO: 1600 Exposure: 120 sec Subs taken: Lights: 101, Darks: 70, Bias: 73, Flats: 72, Dark Flats: 72 Filters: L-Pro Bortles class: 7/8 PP software: APP, SN++, PS 2021 Equipment: SW EvoStar 80ED, SW 0,85 FF/R, Canon 6D (modified), SW HEQ5 Pro Comments: 1st attempt on object, 2 session project More info about objects: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eagle_Nebula Thanks for looking, Raf

9 months in hobby Object: The Veil, East, NGC6992 and West, NGC6960 Nebulas Date: 09.08.2021, Light frames: ~00:05AM - 03:55AM ISO: 1600 Exposure: 150 sec Subs taken: Lights: 71, Darks: 35, Bias: 35, Flats: 35, Dark Flats: 35 Filters: L-Pro Bortles class: 7/8 PP software: APP, SN++, PS 2021 Equipment: SW EvoStar 80ED, SW 0,85 FF/R, Canon 6D (modified), SW HEQ5 Pro Thanks for looking, Raf

Great work guys, well done and congratulations!

Object: The Whirlpool Galaxy (also known as Messier 51, M51, and NGC 5194) Date: 11-05-21, Light frames: ~11:15PM - 03:00AM and 17-01-21, Light frames: ~04:20AM - 06:30AM ISO: 1600 Exposure: 180 sec Subs taken: Lights: 97, Darks: 60, Bias: 70, Flats: 82, Dark Flats: 75 Filters: L-Pro Bortles class: 7/8 PP software: APP, PS 2021 Equipment: SW EvoStar 80ED, SW 0,85 FF/R, Canon 6D (one session on unmod, 2nd on mod), SW HEQ5 Pro

If you have guide cam you definitely should try SharpCap or something similar because of at least 3 reasons. It is quicker, more accurate and more reliable as EQDIR cable is plugged directly to your mount (to hand controller port) so ASCOM/EQMOD "talks" directly to it, not through middle device, the SynScan. But I know a lot of people still use connection through hand controller because they just... get used to it Cheers buddy and clear skies!

Hey @M40. If I remember well, driver itself without package needs mount to be plugged and turned on. Then you can go to device manager, select newly appeared device and install driver for it. Executable one could be more convenient but tbh I didn't try it. Cheers buddy!

A WE SO ME! 🤯 Welcome on SGL Andy!

Our satellite, Moon. This is stack of 40 subs taken on ISO 200 and 1/400 sec of exposition with L-Pro UT LPF on 26-02-2021 around 4:30AM. Software used: APP and PS 21.

It is beautiful. Well done! Below is my first attempt on M51 from last Saturday. It's not even close

Your photo is absolutely brilliant. Hats off. Thank you for sharing also with Ha tutorial. Do you think adding it to unmodified DSLR used in Bortle 7 make any sense? Cheers, Raf

As I remember it was painful for me at the beginning to find complex list of the software that needs to be installed on your PC to control your rig remotely so I have decided to tie all things together and share. I will try to explain it simplest I can. As whole idea is quite complex I am not going to be too detailed. You can treat it as quick catch up for novices and beginners only. I have tested it all on Windows 10. I am a beginner as well but true is that I have struggled a lot to find those information all together (what actually you need to install) so it could make some confusion for novices I think. That’s why I want to tight things a bit together and reveal the tip of the iceberg. But at least COMPLETE tip. It should be suitable for most of equatorial mounts with guider. First why I am not using SynScan hand controller? Answer is simple. Controlling rig through PC is way more accurate and more convenient. So in general I have USB hub attached to one of tripod legs. To this hub I have connected: HEQ5 Pro mount through EQDIR USB cable (it is plugged on mount into hand controller port) ZWO ASI 120MM-S guide camera which is attached to my guide scope Canon 6D camera 2 x dew heater straps (for scope and guide scope). Those are attached to charging only ports on my USB HUB. Mentioned USB HUB is plugged to the laptop which is outside, close to my rig during sessions. Then I use RDP to connect to laptop from inside of my house as both, laptop and my desktop are connected to the same router. Concept is simple as you can see but it needs whole bunch of software to be installed and configured to work properly. Again I will go through it quickly to do not mess too much and I will try to provide links for some tutorials which I have used at the beginning to understand whole concept. ASCOM; You can understand it as a platform which will create environment for EQMOD driver (I will explain what EQMOD is in next paragraph). This, alongside with EQMOD, is core part which will communicate with your rig through USB and also will create a kind of link between all astrophotography software that you need. Please watch Dylan’s short vid who has explained it in convenient way: https://youtu.be/Se88i3Cs6M0. You can find and download ASCOM platform in here: https://ascom-standards.org/. EQMOD (EQASCOM) is a driver that provides the astronomical 'brains' of the mount control system as per: http://eq-mod.sourceforge.net/eqaindex.html. As you can see there a list of functionality is huge. You can download it from here: https://sourceforge.net/projects/eq-mod/files/EQASCOM/. FTDI Virtual COM Port Driver is another small piece of software that you need to install. In general it is driver for your EQDIR cable. To be honest I haven’t heard about it in ANY tutorial. Like everybody has forgot about it but without it nothing will work. So in general EQDIR USB cable needs to be emulated as standard COM/Serial device. You can find it in here: https://www.ftdichip.com/Drivers/VCP.htm. It will install itself as COM1, 2 or 3 device. You will need to pick same port in EQMOD with same speed. Above three apps are core and needs to be installed. If you have doubts (I am sure you do, like I had a bit more than a month ago) please just lurk YouTube and watch more related tutorials. You will need also to install drivers for your main and guide cameras. You can find it on your manufacturers website. Now I will describe software of my choice (of course you can pick another, as there is a few alternatives for each of it). Those software will let you auto guide your object in more accurate way, perform polar alignment without looking through polar scope, will help you to plan your session on particular objects and check FOV, will control your main camera wit GoTo functionality and many others: PHD2. Ok in here there are no alternatives. If you have decided to control remotely you rig you need an autoguiding software and PHD2 is probably only or at least best and simplest option. In general it will connect with your mount, guider, will “stick” on one or more stars close to your object, will look on it carefully through your guide scope/guide camera and will send information to your mount how and where it should move to stay on track. You can visit again Dylan for more info: https://youtu.be/Mt0luBLaHDw. You can download PHD2 from here: https://openphdguiding.org/. This is first example of software that will communicate and control your rig through 3 core software described above. SharpCap; This is actually software of my pick. Its main purpose is planetary astrophotography but it has one very useful for me functionality. A great and cheap tool for polar alignment. You don’t even need to look through your polar scope or spent fortune on dedicated polar cameras. It will use your guide scope camera! I have used this tutorial to learn it: https://youtu.be/ivlgbgNIeTU. It is really simple and straight forward. No more kneeling in the wet grass for just 10 quids: https://www.sharpcap.co.uk/. If you struggling with standard PA process you should definitely consider to check it out. I am super happy with it. Cheers @SharpCap. Stellarium. This is planetarium software of my pick. I use it to plan my session in time, plan FOV (at what angle should the main camera be attached to the focuser to cover object in best possible way) and before I used it as GoTo tool (now I use Plate Solving GoTo). You can find more info and download it in here: http://stellarium.org/ A lot of people use app called “Cartes du Ciel” but I have never tried it.. Astro Photography Tool – APT. Next software of my pick. I use it to control my main camera, plate solving and few other minor, but still very important things. Cost is less than 20 quids per year for further updates. I think I have decided for APT because I like interface, functionality and something silly- most of experienced astrophotographers which I have watched on YT have used it. And I absolutely do not regret it. You can check demo version or buy it in here: https://www.astrophotography.app/downloads.php. You can watch Trevor’s walkthrough as well: https://youtu.be/icd9Tlrb9Jg. Lots of astrophotohraphers uses NINA which is offering similar functionality and it’s free. I haven’t tried it for longer yet as I have already get used to APT but if you want and you will like it - it could save you 20 quids. Plate Solving – is one of very cool APT and NINA functionality (based on external free software). In general it works like this: You can for example take a blind shoot of night sky and ask plate solve software to tell you where exactly you are shooting with your scope and how FOV look like for you. So if your software knows it already it can take you to any other object on the sky just like that (like GoTo). I have learned how to install and use it from this video: https://youtu.be/dpYXoYEKFpA. It is 2 apps plus databases. You can also consider to buy (or at least check out) ZWO ASIAir. In general it is micro PC which has all software similar to above installed and tied together on one simple panel which you can control through WiFi on your tablet. A lot of astrophotographers use it. I didn’t have any occasion to try it yet but it looks so complex and simple in the same time. Definitely it looks very convenient and handy as well. At the end just few words about post processing software of my choice: AstroPixelProcessor; why I have decided to pay 60 quids to rent (or 200 to own) software to stack images if there is free Deep Sky Stacker? Because I live in Bortle class 7/8 area so my data is not the best quality. I have found that APP is handling it much better and it has important for me, and well working functionality to remove light pollution and perform initial photo stretch. You can find more info in here: https://www.astropixelprocessor.com/. I have learned it from Tim’s tutorial: https://youtu.be/9EAKNqZ201Q. It is very simple in use as you won’t need to change most of the default settings. Someday maybe I will switch to PixInsight which offers even more cool postprocessing functionalities but like for now I am happy with APP + PS 2021. PhotoShop. I am absolutely not PS magician but I just get used to it already. You can try free GIMP if you would like to. If you have read this to the end you see that actually to control your rig remotely and PP your photos you need to install… around 15 different applications and drivers. As I have mentioned at the beginning this makes a lot of confusion for beginners because you can find detailed instructions for particular programs or drivers but you will never find complex list from A to Z (at least I haven’t found) of software that you will need. I will highlight it once again that most of the described apps are my personal choice and you can find other options (I have tried to provide a few alternatives). Another problem is that most of this software needs to be configured properly so unfortunately you will need to dig more on your own but I think this is pretty good portion of information if you have just started. Good luck and clear skies, Raf

Hey Guys, I am going to add 2" filter wheel to similar setup but with DSLR. What about placing it between ff/r and focuser? Hopefully posting in here is a good idea rather than starting new thread, if not my apologies. Cheers, Raf

Hello Guys! As I have started my adventure with astrophotography exactly one month ago but I still wanted to make this "fancy strip" so here I am with my summary of December 2020 I know quality is much below decent but I am still happy what I have managed to get from zero in 30 days. By this occasion I would like to thank you as without your advices it won't be possible. Happy New Year SGL!

Hey Olly. My intention wasn't to point with finger on particular photos, especially photographers. I have highlighted in my first post what was my concerns on examples of Rosette or Orion nebulas. Cheers!

Haha @vlaiv it sounds reasonable but isn't it going too far from what we call "amateur astrophotography"? Even for me, person who has considered it more as a way of showing objects possibly closest to their natural look it is too much probably Maybe one day imaging technology will be so advanced that we wouldn't need to touch science so hardly and overkill the joy But still, probably you are right.

I had a small conversation with one guy which probably prove there is something like "natural look of objects". Let me try to explain as I am not an expert on this matter and I have no guarantee that our conclusions were right. So in general human eye is able to recognize light waves up to 700-750nm. For H-alpha it is 656nm, for SII 672nm and for OIII it is 495-500nm. The issue is that both, cameras and human eyes overlaps some of those signals so for example OIII is registered as blue and green pixel. That's why Oxide with dual bands filters show it as blue-green'ish. To make things even more complicated we should consider also what @vlaiv has mentioned - issues with colours on displays. So as per above "natural look" of mentioned, as an example Rosette nebula, if we will consider it as made mostly of hydrogen with some of trioxygen inside - it will be definitely red'ish and blue'ish inside so other concepts are just an freestyle interpretations/art. But still from the other hand.... We can't be sure what is on the way to it. Between us and the object. What kind of gases, dust etc. is making impact on colours. That's why probably I will give up on thinking about this topic as considerations of the natural look of objects from Earth vs natural look of object while observer would be close to it sounds pointless so finding of unequivocal answer is impossible.

@endless-sky good point of view on it. Thanks! @vlaiv nice elaboration about the colours, thanks! @Moonshed atm my PS skills are very basics so I do more experiments each time than actually I have some point-to-point workflow planned so usually I still merge layers because it's handy for me when I try next PP step. I know it isn't best practice

@Moonshed true, this was one of my concerns. If we will agree that final photo should be close to the original look of object, what should be considered as appearance pattern then? And this probably doesn't exist. @runway77 thank you, I will check this out. @endless-sky I think you re right and it's reasonable that details are more important, but there is really no way to keep colours at least close to reality instead of making whole blue Rosette or white Orion nebula? From the other hand I have to admit those photos look still, somehow amazing to me. Not sure because I like it or I appreciate tons on work on postprocessing of it. My wife has commented it in the way that it is same story like with photoshoped girls on the covers of the magazines. Everybody know it is kind of fake but still everybody likes it. And probably this is very adequate comparison. @pete_l Thank you for your input. This is very good point that amateur astrophotography is a hobby, not a science. I always keep my raws in 2 locations. One in safe place, untouched, even with failed subs, 2nd production copy on which actually I work. Thank you all for your time responding me. Knowing more experienced users point of view will let me to calibrate my own as there is nothing worse than going to one or the other extremum imho.

@endless-sky Thank you for your reply. So in general your point is that details are more important than colours actually?

Hello Guys, I am an absolute beginner as I have started with astrophotography less than one month ago. I am not sure if these kind of questions are typical only for newbies or this is something common. So astrophotography is about to show objects in clear way, possibly closest to how actually those objects look like or this is an art to attract audiences so casual interpretation is allowed (of course within the limits of good taste)? To be honest before I have started I was sure this is more about showing objects the way they look like but apparently I was wrong. From the other hand how we can be sure object (especially in terms of colours) really look like if ever scope/lens have different colour sensitivity? I will give you an example. As far as I know Rosette nebula is made of hydrogen, maybe with some trixogen in the middle so first thoughts that you have is that is should be red'ish and blue'ish inside what most of the photos of this object confirms. But I see a lot of adaptations where it is whole blue, rusty brown or whatever. Same with Orion nebula. Nowadays I see a lot of adaptations where it has external layers of nebulosity... WHITE. And I would say those photos collect the most of recognition. My apologies for chaotic way of explaining my doubts but I really wonder what is your opinion when it comes to natural photos, maybe with a bit bumped colours, contrast etc. or stunning, overedited "arts"? Probably truth is somewhere in the middle, in the sweet spot but my concerns is that those overedited/unnatural photos are a way more popular.

Sorry, I haven't read whole thread but I had same problem after my mount has passed meridian and didn't do the flip (my fault as I haven't turned on auto flip in APT nor forced it).

My 1st attempt on Rosette.

My first attempt on Horsehead Nebula (isn't any good one but I am still happy I was able to capture it - next one will be better ) And this is actually my 3rd or 4th attempt on Andromeda. First one that I am pretty happy with. Andromeda isn't an easy object on highly light polluted sky.

My first attempts on TGON and Pleiades. Actually I am rly happy after struggles with Andromeda.

David thank you very much for your effort. Another colleague has told me the same - this material is pretty ok'ish but you have missed the focus. I think I really need to take a closer look to my focuser as I have some problems with it. I use Bathinov mask, then while I am locking focus it's moving a bit so just before lock it need to be a bit out of focus to take into account this slight move. I have FF screwed to nosepiece and it's placed in focuser. Then on other side Canon t-ring and DSLR. I think I can feel small loose between t-ring and dslr. What do you mean by adjusting of t-ring? Problem with my focuser (Crayford) is that if scope is in vertical position and if I push a bit (rly, rly tiny bit) locker screw, focuser is not moving at all. But after I loose it just by another tiny bit, focuser tube going down under load of DSLR. Not sure I can adjust it with those small screws on the bottom of focuser but I will try. Another problem probably is that usually I set the focus on Polaris, just after PA and then I am not adjusting in after GoTo to the object. In case of this material I did even worse. If I remember well I have rotated DSLR in focuser after GoTo object to catch better FOV without adjusting of focus after. Your M31 is brilliant And I have switched to APP as per your advise but have some problems with it. I can not adjust RAM about and I work only on default 2GB so processing takes forever. Support look for the solution for me. Clear skies David!