AMcD

24 minutes ago, ollypenrice said:

Wow, that's really well resolved and the colour is convincing as well. An exceptional image.

Olly

Thank you for your generous words Olly.  I am very pleased with how it turned out.  Persevering with this hobby through the weather is still worth it!

39 minutes ago, Adreneline said:

Great image and very interesting plate solve - so much to look at.

I was drawn to PGC1650398 because it looks like two interacting galaxies, so I took a closer look in Simbad which appears to confirm just that:

I couldn't seem to find how far away this is though - needs an expert!

You could spend hours investigating this lot!

Thanks for sharing.

 

Fascinating.  There is a real temptation in this hobby to move on to the next image once the last one has been posted, but I too have been dwelling on the abundance of objects in this one.

I have finally managed to complete an image for galaxy season, despite the inclement weather.  This is an LRGB image of NGC2903 taken with a QHY268M and Antlia Pro V LRGB filters through a TS130 Photoline APO mounted on a Paramount MyT and guided with an OAG and ZWO 174MM.  I continue to be very pleased with the performance of the MyT.  The total integration time was 16 hours, comprising 4 hours of 120s integrations each in L, R, G and B under Bortle 5 skies.  The data was acquired using SGPro and processed in PixInsight.  As can be seen from the annotated version, the area is rich in galaxies, including an interesting cluster along the bottom edge of the image.  I have also included a closer crop of the image which reveals quite a lot of detail in NGC2903.  I hope to add some Ha to the image in due course.  Constructive criticism always welcome.

Cropped Version:

Annotated Version:

I think the weather and the inherent complexities of the hobby conspire sometimes to leave us feeling the way you describe.  

As the weather gets worse, the pressure to extract good data from the small number of good nights increases.  

When multiple things go wrong in this context, as they inevitably do in this hobby in which all aspects are interconnected and highly technical, the negative impact on us is amplified by the decreasing window of opportunity.  

I have certainly noticed a new twinge of anxiety when powering up my equipment on a rare clear night, hoping that it is not a night to be ruined electronic or mechanical gremlins.  I am not sure I want my hobby to become a source of stress.

As you say, a break is sometimes a good thing and helps lend perspective.

For my part, I think your image is great.  The colours are subtly done and it has a wonderful natural look.

Many thanks @Richard_, I will give it a go.  Yes, that is what I see when I run SPCC.  Many thanks again.

2 minutes ago, Richard_ said:

Lovely image, well done! I agree with the CC above regarding the purple-ish stars. What is your process flow for the RGB image? Did it include some form of colour calibration (cc/pcc/spcc)?

Arcsinh stretch is meant to retain some colour hue during stretching, but I sometimes find this gives the cores of stars a pink hue and the stars kinda have a red and blue separation like you see with atmospheric dispersion. See below example from Cloudy Nights.

 

Many thanks Richard.   I combine the RGB in Channel Combination, the apply Background Neutralisation and SPCC before removing the stars using StarXTerminator.  From there I stretch the stars only image.  I have been using GHS but I also find I get quite good results from using Masked Stretch.  I wonder whether inverting the image and then applying SCNR would deal with the purple / magenta cast on the stars.

I have entered a version into the image into the current SGL Narrowband Challenge with HOO stars, but looking at @gorann's collection of entries comprising his narrowband masterpieces I suspect a mug is a forlorn hope 🤣

IC443 in Ha and OIII

This version of my most recent image is a rendition of IC443 in Ha and OIII.  This version has HOO stars.  The image was taken with a QHY268M and Antlia Pro 3nm filters on my TS130 Photoline APO.  The TS130 is mounted on a Paramount MyT guided with a QHY OAG and ZWO174MM mini.  The image comprises 6 hrs of 600sec integrations in OIII and 5 hrs of 600sec integrations in Ha.  The data was acquired in late February and early March 2024 with SGPro and processed in PixInsight.

7 hours ago, Fegato said:

That's a wonderful IC443 - subtly done and lots of nice detail!  My only comment would be the stars - to my eye the bluer ones seem maybe a bit purple? But then my eyes are not what they were...

Thanks Fegato, that means a great deal coming from you.  I agree with respect to that stars.  I find processing the stars more challenging than the main event on many occasions.  You would think it would be the other way round. 

I have read about "pre-stretching" them using ArcSin Stretch before applying the final stretch but I have not yet tried that.

4 hours ago, Sunshine said:

Beautiful image!

Many thanks for your kind words.  I am pretty pleased with it and with the performance of the MyT so far 

This is the first image I have acquired using my new mount.  The HOO image of IC443 comprises 6 hours of 600sec integrations in OIII and 5 hours of 600 second integrations in Ha.  The stars are RGB with 20 minutes for each channel.  The data was acquired using my QHY268M and Antlia Pro filters with a TS 130 Photoline APO mounted on a Paramount MyT guided using a QHY OAG and ZWO 177MM mini.  The data was acquired under Bortle 5 skies with SGPro and all processing was done in PixInsight.  Constructive criticism always welcome 🙂

In early January I purchased an unused ex-display Paramount MyT Mark 5 from FLO to replace my aging Losmandy G11.  Unusually for me, I did virtually no research, and certainly none of the anxious back and forth and scouring of SGL and CN that should go with these weighty decisions.  I was looking to replace the G11, and I could not resist the level of discount on a 'premium' mount arising from it being an ex-demo item and proximate to the impending launch of the new MyT Mark 6 mounts from SB.  Whilst that approach to things is probably unwise, I also found it quite liberating and, happily, my experience of the mount thus far has been extremely positive so far.

The build quality of the mount is very impressive.  Even though I am used to the beautifully machined aluminium of the Losmandy, the quality of the construction on the Paramount is immediately evident.  The only slightly surprising thing has been the level of sound emitted from the MyT when the mount is tracking.  I understand that this is normal, but the MyT is louder than my G11 in this regard.  The other notable difference to the G11 is the absence of clutches. The RA and DEC worms on the MyT are either in the engaged position or not.  This means there is a specific transport and unpackaging protocol for the mount to avoid damaging the worm gears.  It has also caused me to think more carefully about the consequences of the observatory roof impacting the telescope as the roof will now not simply push the scope out of the way as would have been the case with the G11's clutches.

Whilst through the mount cabling is provided for, I have found it is not really a practical proposition despite the mount being able to accommodate it.  The reality is that it is incredibly fiddly to accomplish, not really suited to thicker cables such as USB3 without an optional versa plate spacer, appears better suited to set-ups using scope rings on the versa plate rather than dovetails and, as I understand it, risks limiting the life of the cables threaded through the mount as they move repeatedly during slews.

I have a roll off roof observatory in which the mount is permanently mounted.  FLO supplied an adapter plate to enable me to mount the MyT on my existing pier.  The observatory is controlled remotely over the Internet and the mount power supply and communications were wired into the existing system:  

At least for me, this is definitely a mount that required a detailed reading of the instruction manuals prior to setting it up, particularly when it came to ensuring that the mount communicated with the observatory computer (to ensure operation with the software used for capturing data and controlling the observatory remotely) and for getting the best mechanical performance. I found it necessary to plan a pretty structured commissioning process to ensure that I completed all of the steps necessary to get the mount working as it should.

With respect to the software, the mount requires downloading the MK5000 driver and the installing of SBs own software, TheSkyX, which comes included with the mount. TSX does initially present as complex, but if you are used to SGPro or NINA, it is not a particularly steep learning curve as far as the basics of the programme go.  The T-Point module in TSX is excellent and makes accurate polar alignment and the construction of an accurate pointing model quick and easy. Once the T-Point model is completed, ProTrak can assist with accurate tracking.  The PEC evaluation and modelling module is also very easy to use and effectively automates periodic error evaluation, modelling and the application of the PEC model. 

Once the all of the software is set up the mount can be roughly and then finely polar aligned using the T-Point module. This module allows very accurate polar alignment to be achieved in short order.  Thereafter, having calibrated the guiding module in TSX, the SB PEC module can be used to build and apply a PEC model.  Prior to the PEC model being applied, the peak to peak error on the mount was in the region of 5 arc secs, well below the guaranteed specification of 7 arc secs.  After applying the PEC model there is no detectable periodic error reported by the TSX PEC module.  The final set up step was to perform a 300 point T-Point model to ensure accurate go-to pointing and to maximise the efficacy of ProTrak.  Once the model had been constructed and applied, the mount placed the object slewed to in the centre of the cross hairs every time.  

In circumstances where I prefer to control my system with SGPro or NINA, except for T-Point, PEC and Protrak, I am using TSX as a very large ASCOM driver for the MyT.  This requires the downloading of the SB ASCOM 2X Driver to allow SGPro or NINA speak to the mount.  In this regard, the TSX software is conceptually similar to the Germini.Net software used as the ASCOM driver for the G11.  Having started TSX once in Administrator mode, I have been able to connect the MyT to NINA, SGPro, PHD2 and the Talon roof opener software.  The MyT will park prior to the Talon closing the roof in response to an "Unsafe" message from the Cloudwatcher.
 
In terms of customer service, the service from FLO was excellent.  With respect to Software Bisque, have only needed to contact SB once following a delay in them responding to my email request that they register my mount and software (the process is not yet automated).  They responded immediately to the reminder and were apologetic for the delay.  The website now has my subscription details and additional downloads of updates etc. have been smooth.

Of course the proof is, as they say, in the pudding. Once I had polar aligned, completed the PEC training and completed the T-Point model, I took a 5 minute unguided test exposure in order to get a rough idea how the mount was performing.  This is the single unguided 5 minute exposure (which has had noise reduction applied and been stretched in PixInsight):

Following PEC and T-Point modelling and with ProTrak activated, during guiding with PHD2 I have found the MyT performs well, maintaining an RMS of between 0.25 and 0.35 with an off-axis guider in good seeing.  Importantly, whatever the RMS that is achieved, the RA and DEC RMS figures are consistently very similar.  

I have not had much chance to image with the mount due to the inclement weather, but I did manage this HOO image of IC443 comprising 4 hours of OIII and 2 hours of Ha with RGB stars.   It was taken with my TS130 Apo and QHY268M with Antlia Pro filters and guided with an OAG and ZWO 174MM:

For a price, the MyT Mark 5 can be upgraded in due course with the MK6000 electronics that are standard on the new Mark 6 versions of the mount and, as I understand it, it is easy to swap out damaged belts and worms if that becomes necessary, although again the parts are very expensive.

All in all, I am very pleased with the mount so far, and somewhat relieved that my impulsive approach at the outset has not yet lead to disaster. 

After 15 years of use, I managed to get a final three hours in last night on my second hand Losmandy G11, ahead of removing it from the pier for the last time to make way for a Paramount MyT.  This image comprises 3 hours worth of 600s integrations taken with a QHY268M and Antlia Pro 3nm h-alpha filter, on my TS130 Photoline Apo, guided with an QHY OAG and ZWO174MM Mini.   There was a good deal of high cloud and I was closer to the Moon than I would have liked.  I will be very sorry to see the G11 go, it has put in great service.

Oh My(T) 🤗

2 hours ago, tomato said:

Do folks still make sky models in the days of rapid and reliable plate solving? It was all the rage when I bought my Mesu back in 2014, the Sitech manual had pages and pages dedicated to it, but now I slew to the target from the park position, then a 10 second plate solve and centre on the object. This assumes you are imaging with the scope of course, not visual.

With my G11/Gemini I have not been bothering with a model as, after a solve and sync, plate solving and centring usually gets me within a few pixels of the target.  I suspect I will try T-Point to build a model as I have a permanent set up and am curious to see how it works.

26 minutes ago, Stuart1971 said:

Nice, a great mount from what I have read…

 I think you need dedicated software for these mounts, if memory serves, The Sky or something like that, and it has to be used to do the mount modelling…

I have started to read up on the SkyX software and it would appear conceptually similar to the Germini.Net software used with my current Losmandy G11, in that SkyX can be used as the ASCOM driver for the MyT in the same way as the dedicated Germini.Net software is used as the ASCOM driver for the G11.  The need to make the model for the MyT in SkyX would appear similar to the need to make any adjustments to the Losmandy mount settings using Germini.Net.   In the circumstances, I am hoping to be able to continue using SGPro or NINA with SkyX sitting in the background as the driver.🙂 

8 hours ago, fwm891 said:

Don’t discount the iOptron CEM 70 & 120 mounts great workhorses. I have an older CEM 60 which ( touch wood) is going strong still. iOptron are known more for their mounts.

Well, it was not such a long run up after all.  I am not sure whether I have been canny or stupid, but I decided to purchase the ex-demo Paramount MyT that First Light Optics had available. 

On the plus side, it allowed me to save £2.5K on the new list price for the mount, keeping me closer to my original budget.  I also have the security of a manufactures warranty and the reassurance that comes with buying from an established vendor. 

On the down side, I have done virtually no research, and certainly have done none of the anxious back and forth and scouring of SGL and CN that usually goes with these decisions, although I am finding that strangely liberating! 

The mount arrives at the weekend and I may do a separate post on setting it up, solving the inevitable teething issues etc.  It will also allow me to relate whether this cavalier approach leads to triumph or disaster! 🫣

P.S. After giving me a whole evening of inexplicable problems with no obvious cause, the bloody G11 is now guiding along at 0.6 RMS (which it almost never achieves) like nothing happened.🙄

7 minutes ago, Laurin Dave said:

There’s a Mesu 200 on Astrobuysell for £3500..  which might interest you .. plenty of happy Mesu owners on here including myself.   

Thanks @Laurin Dave.  I have read great things about Mesu mounts and have always remembered @ollypenrice's view that "they just work", which is certainly what I am looking for after this evening.  Am I right in thinking that the firmware for the Sitech box now provides for ASCOM park commands and the like?

Very good point Francis!  It will be carrying a TS Optics 130 Photoline APO with a QHY268M camera with a QHYM filter wheel and QHY off-axis guider.  I also have a Pegasus Power box on the scope.  All in all, about 15kg / 34lbs I think.

There is a fine line between the enjoyment of tinkering with a mount and that mount starting to obstruct the enjoyment of the hobby.  I fear I have reached that point with my venerable, second hand Losmandy G11 after another moonless evening of problem solving rather than imaging.  I clearly looked downcast because my spouse asked me whether it is time to buy a new mount!

I concentrate on imaging and have a roll off roof observatory that is set up for remote operation over the internet.  I am now looking for a replacement mount for the observatory that (a) I can control, park etc. remotely via NINA, SGPro or similar, (b) that will, subject to seeing, achieve reliable sub-arc second guiding without the need for constant mechanical adjustments and (c) will not completely break the bank, or in any event will come in at around £3,500 (or maybe a little more when I remember I have had the G11 for nearly 15 years).

Not having 'shopped' for a mount for over a decade, I am having trouble seeing the wood for the trees.  Any advice, experiences or recommendations would therefore be very much appreciated. 🙂

On 28/12/2023 at 21:39, orly_andico said:

My comment... is that the weight suspended on the end of a flexible cord may induce some resonance that may disrupt the guiding.  My personal experience with east-heavy bias (albeit not on a G11) is that the RA RMS guiding was cut in half when east heavy (!!) so definitely worth looking into. But I didn't use such a system, I just moved the counterweights up on the CW shaft to make the system east heavy (obviously won't work after a meridian flip).

The cord does not appear to flex.  It is paracord and is kept fully taught by the weights.   I have a considerable area of sky post meridian flip.  I have added this system as I control the observatory remotely and am not present to move the counterweight post meridian flip.🙂

A sublime image.  The composition is spectacular, a stairway to the Gods!

This data was a joy to work on, compared to what I am able to extract from my Bortle 5 location. The entry was processed entirely in PixInsight, using the narrowband colour mapping script to combine the Ha, OIII and SII channels.

I used the following workflow to produce the image:

PIXINSIGHT

Linear:

- Star Alignment of Ha, OIII and SII channels;
- Dynamic Crop to remove any stacking artefacts;
- Dynamic Background Extraction for each channel;
- Calculate PSF for each channel;
- Apply BlurXterminator to each channel using calculated PSFs;
- Combine channels by assigning colour values at full saturation to each channel (Ha: 353; SII: 25; OIII: 195) and applying Background Neutralisation in NBColourMapper;
- Apply StarXterminator to combined image to produce starless image and stars image;
- Apply NoiseXterminator to starless image;
- Stretch starless image and stars image using Generalised Hyperbolic Stretch;

Non-Linear:

- Adjust contrast with Curves;
- Adjust Colour Saturation;
- Local Histogram Equalisation to bring out large and small structures;
- Bring out further detail and highlights using range, luminance and colour masks;
- Add back stars using PixelMath;
- Apply star reduction script;
- Adjust black point using Histogram Transformation.

😃

The weather is so epically bad, I have taken to looking at interesting features in my existing images.  This is a very close crop of an image of IC1848 showing the Young Stellar Object Candidate 2MASS J02533920+6030174, to which I applied further processing, including BlurXterminator.  The region in which the object is located is considered in a 2011 paper in The Astrophysical Journal (see Koenig_2011_ApJ_726_18.pdf), a paper looking at young intermediate-mass stars in the area covered by my original image:

The original image (with 2MASS J02533920+6030174 arrowed) covered a much wider field, relatively speaking:

It appears to be widely accepted that an East heavy bias on the RA axis can assist with guiding, by addressing any RA backlash.  Equally, following a meridian flip, there is a need to adjust the weight on the counterweight bar in order to maintain the bias.  This latter requirement presents an issue for me, as I control my observatory remotely due to working away.  This led me to consider the 'RA String Trick' whereby a weight on a string is used to apply a constant bias to the RA axis, allowing the RA axis to be East heavy both before and after the meridian flip without the need for manual adjustment.  Using my less than refined engineering "skills" I built the following system. 

I began by fashioning a bracket to enable me to attach a pulley system to the mount so the necessary counterweights could hang free of the pier:

I then sourced some bearings, pully wheels, axel and fasteners to mount on the bracket in order to hold the pulley wheels that would support the counterweight string:

I then countersunk screw holes into the mount in order to attach the bracket to the mount.  One advantage of having an elderly, second hand mount is that it is less nerve wracking to drill holes into:

The mount was then reassembled (taking the opportunity to clean and re-lubricate all of the bearings):

Once the mount was assembled, the counterweight string was attached to RA axis, looped twice around the RA axis:

Finally, the counterweights were attached to the string.  The counterweights come from an old set of weights that I bought in a fit of enthusiasm as a much younger man and the mounting for the weights was sourced from the fitness section of Amazon:

Having balanced the mount, I then tested the system to make sure the mount could cope with the weight, first with 5lbs and then with 4.25lbs.  The High Torque motors I fitted to the mount last year cope very well with the 5lbs of additional weight on the RA axis.  The RA clutch, however, struggled with the 5lbs and was happier with the 4.25lbs, which was still enough to apply the necessary East heavy bias.

Whether this system will make any appreciable difference to my guiding remains to be seen.  I suspect, given the multiple variables that can impact on guiding, it will be quite difficult to definitely ascribe any improvement to this counterweight system alone, or at all.  All that said, it has been fun to build and I am looking forward to testing it whenever these seemingly eternal clouds clear...