ONIKKINEN

Re: copying files Give Link Shell extension a try? Its a windows plugin that allows you to create symlinks at will, which is essentially copying virtual links to the files to another location but with 0kb file size. I create a symlink of the raw data to the script directory and doesnt matter if its 5 or 500gb it all gets created instantly (and doesnt take any space on the drive).

Stacking multiple nights worth of data is much easier in DSS though, and all the directory creation work can be confusing for a total first timer (such as myself a few years ago). I use my own scripts for calibration (master darks, master darkflat and a hot pixel map for 60/120/240s data on top of flats and lights, this way i dont have to stack 100 darks each time) and then stack manually, because the auto stacking scripts is written so that you dont get to inspect the data or choose the registration/stacking parameters. Bit more involved, but this gets the best out of any dataset compared to full auto.

Siril is really good for a beginner, or for more experienced imagers. You can do the core parts of processing in Siril quite easily, which would be (simplified) something like: Crop out incomplete edges from stacking Remove light pollution/sky gradients with the background extraction tool Colour calibrate using the Photometric color calibration tool Stretch using Asinh transformation and/or Histogram transformation, or the hyperbolic stretch tool but that one is a bit more complicated and probably not something one should look at for the first few attempts. At this point you could export the image in 16-bit TIFF format to further adjust in Photoshop however you like. This is more or less how i process my images, although i do a couple of things in PixInsight too. You could stack in Siril too as it is a bit better and versatile than DeepSkyStacker, but its not nearly as straight forward as the drag and drop simplicity of DSS. So for a beginner my advice would be stacking in DSS, core processing in Siril and then final adjustments in Photoshop. Could use Gimp instead of Photoshop, but i think Photoshop is well worth the money with how many different things you can do in it.

Fresh eyes and a new attempt at processing yielded this: Less crunchy but with more IFN, maybe slightly more detailed? I prefer this one to the original. Stacked a synthetic luminance image from all the CFA channels and used RGB data from the original image in the original post. Tried NoiseXT before BlurXT this time, and stretched with the hyperbolic stretch tool in Siril.

Thank you! Indeed there are, and most seem to be without a PGC name, so probably quite distant.

Thank you! I think i overprocessed it, like i usually do but glad to hear you like it. I used CFA_split stacking, which creates perfectly RGB aligned stars and allows basically any amount of saturation to be applied on them without them showing chromatic issues around the edges. Despite the wind i still had good roundness in all the data, at a minimum of 0.75 roundess. Wind caused equal errors on both axis so no oblong stars as a result.

8 hours with an 8'' newtonian, TeleVue Paracorr, and a RisingCam IMX571 OSC camera: Annotated version: And a blown up crop of the Quintet itself: Not going to compete with Hubble or JWST any time soon when the data is 3.5-4'' fwhm, but an image is an image. Will have to devote more time on this as the details seem like they could use some more quality data to tickle out the fine stuff in the cluster, weather willing of course. Find myself often saying the same, so this will go in the ever expanding target category of "needs more time" which at the moment would probably last me a few years at best to finish. First night gave around 5 hours in early September with a 50% Moon and not great transparency. Second night was crystal clear with very good transparency, but the scope was sailing in high winds with an end total of 1.4'' RMS guiding error so a lot of the data had to be scrapped, and the data that made it just isn't very sharp because the scope was having a seizure in the wind every other minute. MacGyvered an impromptu wind shelter by stacking various items/bags used to carry the kit found in my car on the roof of my Ford Focus parked right next to the scope (the scope is much taller than the car, even at minimum tripod extension) which may have helped, if only by giving me something to do other than look at the seismograph that was the guide graph. Comments, critique welcome! -Oskari

I have an Ecoflow River 300 (no longer sold), which is a 288wh battery and its not overkill at all if its cold outside. During warmer weather (above 0) it will easily last through any night with power left to spare. I am using an AZ-EQ6, cooled IMX571 camera, guide camera, and a windows 10 mini-PC with a travel router with it. For my next power station i will be looking for a bigger one, or splitting the power load to another small one beside the River 300, but i image in a cold climate so not something most will have to worry about.

Not too different from the L-pro?

Control the setup with something other than the Asiair to close out the possibility of it being the issue. Maybe you have a laptop you could jury rig to take the Asiair's place? You could also crack out the multimeter and check the power supply, just to be sure it is actually working properly, voltage drops could easily cause weird connectivity issues if they happen.

Do you know if it has been serviced? Might be necessary to check the innards and maybe replace some bearings if it has seen a few too many winters without a cleanup. I serviced my brand new AZ-EQ6 and still saw an improvement because the factory finish is not all that high tech.

Its really good for the price. Comes with accessories for both the camera end and telecope end to M42, M48 and M54, and has a sturdy focuser and is sturdy in general. Highly recommended, much better than the other OAG i have, a TS16mm one where if you tally up the price of the accessories will be the same price as the Askar, but the TS one is unstable on the guide camera side.

Although i think this is an unpopular opinion, i would recommend an OAG even for a smaller scope or a refractor. Maybe not for a redcat51 or a very small scope like that, but for most scopes i would go OAG and certainly for the 2 scopes you mentioned here an OAG would be my choice. If you go for an OAG with an included focuser, like the Askar M54 OAG, there is hardly any extra faff or setup required other than figuring out the adapter train for back focus. But after all that is done its no more difficult to use than a guide scope, in fact i think its easier since you wouldn't really have to touch it unless you took the imaging train apart for some reason. No chance of differential flexure ruining an image and you get the best possible guiding performance since the imaging scope will surely outperform any guidescope even if the guide stars are banana shaped (PHD2 guides on bananas and triangles just fine). So my vote goes for the OAG.

Maybe a little bit of IFN/dust too? Hard to tell if some is pushing trough the background or not. Milliquas catalogue annotation also finds some 3+ redshift quasars in this field. Lots to look at here!

Loads of backlash in there, that the mount is trying to fight but just ends up fighting itself by overcorrection: All those hollow red vertical bars are attempts to guide in declination, which fail until the backlash has been cleared and now the axis is catapulted way beyond where it was supposed to go. Rinse and repeat for most of the night. You also have a substantial error in both axis with 1.48'' in RA and 2.17'' in DEC, and the much larger error in declination here which is why we see elongated stars. Most mounts should be able to do 1'' RMS error on both axis, so something to fix. Something is mechanically not all right in the setup i would say. How are the basics of the mount, and i should probably ask what mount is it? I see its EQMOD driven but that could be any Skywatcher mount really as they all say that same HEQ5/6 name no matter the actual mount. Things to see to would be for example proper balance of both axis, backlash adjusted to be tolerable and/or compensated for in PHD2 settings (run guide assistant to give pointers on what to adjust).

Just seen the image now. Looks like the elongation is suspiciously close to being entirely in Declination, suggesting generic guiding issues (like excessive backlash) rather than simple flexure. Could be flexure too, but this seems rather extreme for just that. If you have a guide log you can attach here then we could have a look and form a more educated guess.

I dont really like Registax either, its really showing its age in today's world with loads of better alternatives. No need to do anything to the video in there, just the stacked file from AS!3, or if working with a mosaic i will stitch the panels together first before RGB balancing. The only thing i do there is the RGB balance tool with the auto-balance setting, then click do all and save image to work with it more in Photoshop.

It could also be differential flexure between your guider and the telescope, which is why with a reflector you really want to have an OAG instead of a guide scope. The mirror can flop or shift on its own during imaging, mainly as it is effected by gravity in different orientations, but the focuser and the rest of the telescope itself could also be wobbly. All of that will result in the guidescope reporting everything as a-ok while the images show elongation. With an OAG the guider works with the exact same optics as the imaging camera, so there is smaller chance of what you describe happening.

Give the RGB balance tool in Registax 6 a try? I use it to start the color balance routine, and dont use any in-camera or capture software RGB balancing. It doesn't quite do a perfect job, but its close enough that saturation can be boosted without any single hue taking over the image completely. Once i have increased saturation (something like +20 saturation 5-10 times in photoshop) to a point where the colours can easily be seen its then not too difficult to manually adjust the channels to appear neutral.

ToupTek manufactured IMX571 cameras also exist as an Altair Hypercam version, an Omegon VeTec version and many others. Have seen Lacerta, Orion, Explore scientific, Lapsun (aliexpress) and so on. The best deal changes often with usually the Rising cam, Altair, and TS versions similarly priced with minor differences if any.

These are both really nice! Your frac makes some really sharp lunar shots for sure. Regarding RGB, where do you think the issue is with your setup? Processing is really finnicky and its easy to get an overpowering single hue that makes it difficult to differentiate between the delicate colours.

Maybe calling an 8 hour image taken from bortle 3-4 is not all that fair... Did end up using the data in a 35h total image in the end so not just a test in the end, but this stack and image was processed as a test is what i meant with that.

I see tilt was already mentioned, but i will further complicate the topic by mentioning that there is no easy way to tell the difference between tilt and collimation because they affect the image similarly. Really you should think of both issues as a core part of collimation.

I did, and have used it a number of times since. I think its a nice compromise filter for someone who wants to dip their toe into narrowband imaging but isn't just mainly interested in emission nebulae (and preferably no major light pollution - not the ideal filter for that). Some example images with the filter below: Couple of hours if i recall, from B8 and moonlight: This one was a test image on how much it picks up Ha (for 8h total), not sure i ever posted it anywhere since its not really a finished image: 38 minutes from Bortle 3-4: 2h40min, bortle 5-ish maybe: 3 hours if i recall, from bortle 6-ish conditions or thereabouts: As some closing thoughts RGB processing is not too difficult with the filter with only minor adjustments needed to get an image that has passable/neutral looking star colours, which is the strong point of the filter. For OAG guiding purposes i had issues with a 120MM that would not guide all that well trough the filter with my f/5 newtonian (filter before coma corrector in this case). Upgraded to a 220MM and never lost a guide star again, so this filter is not too difficult to use from that point of view either. Price seems very cheap too. Overall a recommended purchase for someone who knows what they want.

You have what looks like flat issues in the corners, best shown here in this Siril false colour rendering mode: Could also be some other issue, like light leaks but this is what shifted flats would look like. If you crop a little bit the gradient is quite easy to work with. I placed some samplers on the dusty parts, but im not sure you have to. I think its a decent sample for background though. The resulting image is not too hard to work with to get the dust out: