Jump to content

Banner.jpg.b83b14cd4142fe10848741bb2a14c66b.jpg

Pitch Black Skies

Members
  • Posts

    716
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Pitch Black Skies

  1. Definitely a bit of an improvement here I think.. Before After
  2. That's really nice. Great detail in the core. Background light level looks good.
  3. Yeah that wouldn't be my cup of tea. Definitely an improvement over mine though.
  4. Is it just a matter of playing around with those settings until it looks pleasing to the eye? I've just tried cropping in with the ROI levels and it reduced the stretch considerably, so made a huge difference. I didn't touch gamma, shadows and fine detail. TY
  5. So I am trying AutoDev after Wipe now but it is redoing the global stretch and looks far too aggressive. Is there a way of dialing it back a little? What do think I am doing wrong?
  6. Excellent. It would be great to find out how I can produce something similar with just Startools.
  7. Yes, I start with AutoDev, Crop, Wipe, and then FilmDev. I typically stretch to between 96-97% in Digital Development.
  8. DSS for stacking, Startools for post processing.
  9. Hi guys, Could I get a bit of feedback please? I feel my pictures look heavily processed and unrealistic. This is an example of M101. It is 19hrs fully calibrated. I use DSS to stack and Startools to post process. I think Startools is the culprit, however I am only using each module once and never increase their parameters.
  10. Don't know what that means. Are you referring to the name of the file being very long? "in my opinion the background is too black - I suspect you may have clipped some of the darker detail." When I make it brighter, the galaxies tend to look animated or CGI.
  11. Is there any benefit to the OP exposing for 180s over 50s? Is 50s the minimum amount of time to expose, and then anything longer increases SNR?
  12. Really nice 👍 Mine seem to end up looking unrealistic. Any ideas?
  13. So I've read your post and really enjoyed it, and it's not the first time you've answered one of my questions with such clarity and detail. I really think you should write an astronomy/astrophotography book, seriously. I've been wanting to say it for a while. Now here's an utterly stupid question. How is someone supposed to know what FWHM they have at a given location?
  14. Awesome, will have to give this a proper read later. Legend.
  15. Hi @alacant Following our chat earlier, Is there anything obvious that you can see I should do to improve performance? I'm thinking the next steps could be; - a longer dovetail or Losmandy plate - possibly flocking the interior although not too pushed on that Cheers
  16. Yeah it's probably too much for the HEQ5. I think I'll stick with the 130 for now. It's a great little scope when tuned up. Would you recommend replacing the 130s dovetail with a Losmandy plate? Actually, if I post a picture of my setup in the 130 thread, would you take a look and recommend some improvements or mods?
  17. Do you think the Quattro 8s would be a more sensible upgrade?
  18. In a similar situation myself but I try to get about 3 nights per target. I'm aiming for 16-24 hrs total integration time.
  19. Really nice, although I wonder if the 130 could produce something similar? I'm guessing yes, but it would require more time.
  20. Ordered the belt kit yesterday, hopefully it will make a difference. I use an ASIair Pro, I don't think there is any PEC training capability with it yet unfortunately. I should probably try to spend more time with the 130. It's a very capable scope.
×
×
  • 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.