Jump to content

Narrowband

Recommended Posts

Olly, my CS3 from an Amazon re-seller is loaded onto my new Win 7 machine. I have had no real clear sky this year so I have yet to use all the new stuff in anger.

As a general point, for those trying to follow a lesson in PS, if the tutor is going too fast with the cursor remind him/her that if you press the Ctrl key the cursor changes to the Move tool which is big and very visible. I always use this whenever I want to emphasise where exactly the cursor is.

Dennis

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 115
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Alright, I got a break over lunch and made a basic photoshop intro. I tried to only explain enough in PS to get you started, where to find certain things you will hear mentioned, and the main things you will use when starting to process astrophotos. I am uploading it now and will post a link as soon as its up - for those interested, have a look and if you want me to go even more basic I can do that (I will actually plan it out next time rather than winging it over lunch) ... hope its helpful

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I bought Photoshop and I consider it the best investment I have made in regard to not only my astrophotos, but my day to days as well. I am sure there is freeware out there that can do all of these things, and probably folks who can do it faster and better....and, shame on me, I use Windows AND I LIKE IT! All the freeware in the world will not help schmuckoes like me, who rely upon PS for years of users, resources, updates and references.

IMHO, and to those who can afford it, there is simply no more versatile, in depth and critical tool for improving all images than Photoshop. When considering your AP budget, it should be a line item for consideration. I was going to spend more on my scope, but I decided PS would help me more than another 25mm on a lens or a better focuser...no regrets!

The one area i spent a lot of time on was a good reference book for PS....I read the reviews, talked to users, did my research. Frankly, there is a lot of stuff out there that should be avoided. I ended up buying Photoshop CS5: The Missing Manual and found it to be my second best investment; clear, well organized, coincise, references to other processes in the book, and lots of examples on the included disc to work through.

I do not apologize for relying on Windows or Photoshop, they are very powerful tools and, compared to most of the other software I own, intuitive and user friendly once you know the basics. I spent several weeks studying my book and practicing with Photoshop before jumping into AP...big help to me.

Joe

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi

If you intend to get anywhere in this game , you pick your software and study away :(

None of the processing software like Pixinsight / photoshop etc will let you plug in a image and output a APOD with a click of the button :BangHead:

Lots and Lots of time learning the software is what will get you the results ;) If you have the data of course

Regards Harry Page

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'll stick my hand up and say that I have a legal copy of photoshop CS3, and got it from Amazon for around £130. ;)

When I first got into AP, I bought 'Photoshop Astronomy' by R.Scott Ireland, and went through it from cover to cover.....as Harry says....I studied.

I've recently bought a big thick book specifically on CS3, and shall be studying that too.

Like JoLo, I too use Windows, and like it....I've used windows since getting my first PC back in '99 and apart from the odd minor gripe, have no issues with any of the versions I've used.

I may well get a copy of Pixinsight soon, as from what I'm seeing it appears to be a very powerful program, and when I do, I'll sit down and study it in depth too.

BTW....Harry Webb is better known as Sir Cliff Richard :BangHead:

Cheers

Rob

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi

Who is this Harry Web imposter ;)

Regards Harry Page

Harry...Sorry about that...I've honestly got no idea where the "Web" came from..:BangHead:...and no..I'm not a closet Cliff Richard Fan!!

...also..Thanks for the great video tutorials Harry, as I mentioned I've found them so usefull...

Steve

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Getting back to the thread - I would still like to see some new good beginner tutorials on:-

(a) how to get the best/basics out of Maxim, in terms of optimally combining, use of different combining ratios and how to subtract flats, darks etc in this software package, and

(:BangHead: the basics of using Photoshop, especially all the different types of layers, blends, masks, getting subtlety with colours etc.

Both of these need to be in a simple style that beginners can grasp. Thanks for listening....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

re: Martin ...

(a) sorry can't help much - just started figuring out Maxim recently

(:BangHead: working on it! have most of those covered in the 2 new ones I am working on.... 3rd (hopefully do it tomorrow) will cover more in depth about layers and blends that I didn't cover so in depth in the 1st two (which should be uploaded by morning if my internet connection doesn't go away again cause of rain)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There,s been some replies,from people who are obviously deep into Astro-Photograpy,and are stressing the need to study, study, study,the complex art of Astro imaging.

Nothing wrong with that and i commend you.But not eveyone want s to get that involved,they dont want picture of the month(I,m assuming that of course and may be wrong).I place myself f in that catagory.

I too bought Photoshop Astronomy by Scott Ireland,and to be honest,nearly fell asleep.Its complex long,and i soon found i did,nt want to go to that level.

Please dont take that as i could,nt be bothered,it was just too in depth for me.

I am assuming again there are imagers out there who just want a helping hand to get started,then if they want they can take off.

The imaging world is then at their feet.

Hence a simple walk through start.

Mick.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Good point Rob, Photoshop Astronomy is a great book, lots of good tutorials and examples. It helped me as much with astrophotos as The Missing Manual helped with the basics.

As a user of Maxim, I agree with Martin...there is very little out there in the way of help for this software, it was trial and error with me. The manual that is supplied is useless...no use going over the menu options, when you don't know what they mean to start with! I luv Maxim, but the documentation and help leaves much to be desired....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Mick.....a simple walk through in that book is the chapter on how to create an LRGB image. Get your head around that section and the rest will become clearer with time :BangHead:

Rob

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ok Rob.

I promise i will take it to bed to-night,proberbly my best promise.

TBH Rob,i think my problems are really Calibration,i just cant seem to master flats.I have,nt bothered with Bias Frames either.The thought of taking all these calibration subs through each LRGB filter fills me with horror.

I usually do 10-15 min subs,so for Darks people are telling me to do around 20-30,thats going to be hours just doing the Darks,Its possible,but is,nt it OTT.But Flats yeah definately need some pointers.

I can assemble an LRGB ok,its just the artifacts that people are picking up on.

Again Rob,just a nice clean acceptable image to me is all i require and want.

This Thread was,nt started just for me,as i,m not a total amateur,its for anyone who feels there,s a gap in the market(or so to speak)

Cheers Rob.

Mick.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'll stick my hand up and say that I have a legal copy of photoshop CS3, and got it from Amazon for around £130. ;)

When I first got into AP, I bought 'Photoshop Astronomy' by R.Scott Ireland, and went through it from cover to cover.....as Harry says....I studied.

I've recently bought a big thick book specifically on CS3, and shall be studying that too.

Like JoLo, I too use Windows, and like it....I've used windows since getting my first PC back in '99 and apart from the odd minor gripe, have no issues with any of the versions I've used.

I may well get a copy of Pixinsight soon, as from what I'm seeing it appears to be a very powerful program, and when I do, I'll sit down and study it in depth too.

BTW....Harry Webb is better known as Sir Cliff Richard :BangHead:

Cheers

Rob

Couldn't agree more,study in depth is only way,i spent months learning photoshop from tutorials on the web and probably as much from trial and error,just playing around to see what does what.

You more you put into studying photoshop,the more you will get out of it.

No Pain= No Gain.

My father in Law has the big book on CS3 and it is some read although i doubt if i've ever had the need to use more a tenth of it ,probably less, but whatever you need to do in photoshop,its in that book.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes Mick but you can take your darks on cloudy nights
Sorry Shaun.

But i thought Darks had to be taken on the same night as the image,so as to register the hot pixels that would be present then.

Or am i mistaken.

Mick.

Mick all you need to do with darks is make sure they're at the same temperature as the lights. The darks are for reducing the thermal noise in your images and not really about hot pixels. They also have nothing to do with the optical path so you can do them, as some do, with your camera in the fridge or a cool room.

I have a temperature controlled CCD and I use a library of darks. I take them at set temperatures and use them throughout the year. You can always note the temperature down in the filenames if you're using a DSLR and use them again if you match the temp. Some processing programs will also 'scale' your darks to match the temperature of the lights... or so I am led to believe :BangHead:

So as Shaun says, do em on cloudy nights.

Mark

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ok Rob.

I promise i will take it to bed to-night,proberbly my best promise.

TBH Rob,i think my problems are really Calibration,i just cant seem to master flats.I have,nt bothered with Bias Frames either.The thought of taking all these calibration subs through each LRGB filter fills me with horror.

I usually do 10-15 min subs,so for Darks people are telling me to do around 20-30,thats going to be hours just doing the Darks,Its possible,but is,nt it OTT.But Flats yeah definately need some pointers.

I can assemble an LRGB ok,its just the artifacts that people are picking up on.

Again Rob,just a nice clean acceptable image to me is all i require and want.

This Thread was,nt started just for me,as i,m not a total amateur,its for anyone who feels there,s a gap in the market(or so to speak)

Cheers Rob.

Mick.

Hi Mick....have a look on my website at the 'primers and tutorials' section....there's a whole bunch of info on calibration that will hopefully be of help to you.

BTW....if you're not shooting bias, this is probably why you can't get your flats to work as the flats need to be bias subtracted in order for the correct calibration calculations to be done.

EDIT....I'm sure you had a good night's sleep if you took that book to bed Mick......I do agree, it can be a bit dull, but good :-)

Cheers

Rob

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Bias frames are very quick - they are also independent of the optical path. So you do not need to take them per RGB filter.

I usually take the bias frames while breaking the kit down...

Cheers

Ant

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Mick, If you can leave your scope-camera untouched between sessions (you can take it off and bring it inside but not move camera or focus) then your flats will probably be quite durable.

You can be unlucky and get a big new blob of dust appearing between sessions but I can only remember that happening to me once. To make things simple I do most of my images north-is-up (otherwise Dennis tells me off!) with the camera aligned along RA and Dec. Having a square chip makes this an easy decision...

I then find that a new moon's worth of imaging can be done on one set of flats provided I can persuade the guests to leave the OSC and Mono in the same OTAs of course! (They love to keep me me busy, you see!!!)

I must say that one set of flats is an OSC luxury, by the way.

Olly

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sorry Shaun.

But i thought Darks had to be taken on the same night as the image,so as to register the hot pixels that would be present then.

Or am i mistaken.

Mick.

Yes but your using a cooled CCD yes? then you can take your darks anytime, no one is going to conduct an imaging session of 10 lights at 15 mins and then do 20 darks of the same length are they? You build up a libary of darks and then just forget about them for a few months.. :BangHead:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi

I use a ccd camera and have never used a dark ( master bias only) thier importance ( or lack of ) can be overcome with a good dither and a sigma reject :BangHead:

Harry

That very much depends on the camera, and if you're binning or not, plus your guiding method though Harry.

With my Atik 16HR, I can certainly get away without darks if I'm using a guidescope as it's very low noise, but binned doing 30 minute NB subs it needs them. With an OAG, as there is no drift at all between subs, I find that it's best to use them, and with my H18, they are essential....dithering etc just isn't enough to deal with the noise.

Rob

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Mick, take the BIAS shots, they are the easiest to capture and you only need to 'refresh' them every 6 months or so unless you know that you have picked up a column fault or something similar. I never take DARKS these days but when I did, I stored a whole set at different exposure lengths taken on a various nights when I couldn't image and used them as a 'library'.

Your FLATS are very important and the one calibration frame that we all hate to take especially with a mono camera and filters because we have to take three or four sets BUT they will make for much better images and must be used with BIAS to work correctly. Although it is additional cost, an electroluminescent panel makes this a quick job to do. I use MaximDL and I have a plugin that automates this for me making it even quicker. I confess, even with the EL panel and plugin, I still hate taking flats but when I force myself to do the job properly, it shows in the results!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • 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.