The Lazy Astronomer

Very nice for just a couple of hours - lovely crisp detail on the dark nebula in the tulip. One thing missing though, is the bowshock from Cygnus X-1, which should appear just to the right of the tulip itself; that region looks almost like it's been clone stamped away?

While I don't begrudge anyone for 'dreaming big', I personally don't think we will manage to successfully colonize another planet/moon; at least not one in our own solar system. Maybe many centuries into the future a new technology might afford us interstellar travel to a more favourable environment, but right now, there are areas of this planet which are uninhabited due to unfavourable conditions for supporting human life - if we can't even thrive in the most extreme conditions on Earth, practical paradises in comparison to conditions elsewhere in the solar system, what chance do we really have on another planet?

I guess the most recent "advancement" is the widespread adoption of the newer breeds of CMOS cameras over traditional CCDs. I would think as CMOS technology continues to improve, it may well spell the end for the need for autiguiding.

Very interesting video - having taken a short break from processing recently, it was a little overwhelming to see a whole host of new buttons/options in the new version of the script! Having watched that, I now feel ready to get back into it, so thanks very much guys!

Simple sure, but combining with a basic addition can often lead to clipped stars. The first formula, posted by Rodd above, avoids that (I think it was a recombination method posited by @steppenwolf, or at least, he's the first person I saw publish it). As a side note @Rodd, have you tried the GHS script in PI? Takes a bit of learning, but on the couple of images I've used it on, it's basically negated the need for seperate nebula and star image processing as it helps control stars very well during stretching.

Once you've settled on a target, you'd begin exposing for something in the region of say, 5 - 30 seconds to get an image up on the screen. You'd then continue to loop those exposures and live stacking would combine them to build up a more detailed image. This would all be happening automatically, so as you were talking about it, a better and better image would gradually be appearing, and most likely revealing more of the fainter detail which you could build in to the talk. I'm not au fait with the precise details of it, as I'm pretty exclusively a long exposure astrophotography guy, but the EEVA forums will have loads of info for you.

For the sorts of things you want to do, you'd definitely want to be using some live stacking software - maybe swing on over to the EEVA section of the forums as that's where you'll find the experts in this sort of thing.

For sure that's your weak link. Threaded connections all the way for astrophotography!

It may be some tilt in the imaging train as the stars on the right look a bit elongated, but the ones on the left look pretty round to me.

TIFF = Thousands (of) Incompatible File Formats 😁

If it's sensor damage, then it would appear on lights too, which means it would be calibrated out by the darks, and the dither would help to restore any missing information that would be covered by that area of the sensor.

Ah yes, I see the filename now! At 10:35 this morning the sky would have been very bright (making the assumption you are in Exmouth) and the 294 is very sensitive (QE wise), so I'm not surprised. The panel will help with repeatability for sure, but with no brightness control you're likely to still need a fair amount of tshirt or paper to get the flats long enough I reckon. I use a cheap led tracing panel and even on the lowest brightness level (which is still pretty bright, mind) l need about 4 layers of a white pillowcase for the L filter - this is with the 294 mono. P.s. nothing wrong with being lazy!!😁

So from a quick read of the BBC article, it's been a difficult job to process because it changes frequently. Sounds like they need a bit of Winjupos derotation - anyone got a number for the research team, I'll give them the heads up 😆

What's wrong with 8 layers of tshirt? Are the flats properly correcting the lights?

EZ suite has its own sub menu under script, GAME and GHS would appear under script>utilities, Starnet would be under processes

Here's a few recommendations: EZ processing suite - simplifies some of the more complex things like deconvolution and noise reduction while you're learning https://darkarchon.internet-box.ch:8443/ GHS script for stretching https://ghsastro.co.uk/ Starnet v2 (much better than v1 which comes with PI) https://www.starnetastro.com/ GAME script to assist in mask creation http://www.skypixels.at/pixinsight_scripts.html

There seems to be ringing present in the image above, if you're using ezdecon, then you need to increase the size of your star mask until the dark ringing no longer appears around the stars after running deconvolution.

Obviously the much lauded Making Every Photon Count is the first port of call, but l suspect you've been at this long enough that you're beyond that now. I quite like (and often refer to) Mastering Pixinsight - it's written for all levels, so it can be quite basic in places, but some useful stuff in there nonetheless. Obviously it's focussed around PI, so not a great deal of use if that's not your bag, but I would imagine some stuff would be transferable to Siril.

EAF can support 5kg so as long as you're below that no problem

Actually, for all the attention starlink seems to get on this forum, I can honestly say I haven't really noticed them. Granted I've only been at this for a couple of years, but satellite trials are the least of my worries in astrophotography.... 😁

Another NINA controlled EAF here. All you need to do is make sure you configure the backlash compensation correctly and it works a treat 👌

There should be no reason to use wipe on darks - what do your master darks look like if just stretched?

Not sure how steady your night time temperatures are, or how well your focuser holds once set, but l find that if I leave my equipment (100mm refracter) outside for an hour or more before starting imaging, I don't need to refocus throughout unless I switch filters (a typical session for me is 4 - 5 hours). I use an autofocuser and NINA's HFR measurement tool, so I have a quantitative measurement of focus on each sub.

Don't give him any ideas!! 🤐

Second one for me too - transition from galaxy to background looks more natural, and the fainter outer dust is more visible. The transition seems a bit abrupt in the first one.