Jump to content

NLCbanner2024.jpg.2478be509670e60c2d6efd04834b8b47.jpg

First attempt at M31


Stargazer33

Recommended Posts

It can be quite difficult finding DSOs. Best thing is to get your scope/mount aligned on some bright stars and then your pointing software (eg. CdC or Stellarium) should put you in the right place. I also use an electronic finder - another 1100D with telephoto lens lined up with scope. That can be used with long exposures to home in to a DSO. I've had a lot of problems finding the dim DSOs in the past.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks for all the positive comments.

I think I need to do longer subs in order to register the photons on each frame. To do that I need to do a better alignment with my mount. I have read on another post on the forum about doing the 2 star alignment + calibration star with the CG5-GT, then doing the polar alignment option within the handset menu, then doing a 2 star alignment with 3 calibration stars. Hopefully that should then allow me to do longer subs, maybe as long as 2 mins. That should give me enough data to get something decent out of it.

Now I have a real plan for my next imaging session.

Nice image. I'm still very new at this and have NOT even been able to find it. Clouds and a full moon have been driving me nuts.

Jeff

I know exactly what you are saying Jeff, it took me ages to find M31 with my old manual mount. As for cloudy nights...well it's not repeatable here! :grin:

I think it may be getting a bit late for this now but the Ring nebula (M57) is a good DSO to try as it is between beta and gamma Lyrae, which are very close together. Find Vega and then the paralellogram of 4 stars underneath it. M57 is between the bottom two stars.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just had another try at post processing my M31 data. I was reading in the Sky at Nights 'Complete Guide to Astro Photography' about streatching the histogram to get more out of the data. Unfortunately I don't seem to be able to do that in my copy of Photoshop 7. Maybe it's because my images are .jpg and not in RAW format.

Anyway I had a long play with the levels, colour balance, hue/saturation/lightness and brightness/contrast controls and I think I have improved the final result slightly.

post-21511-0-48486000-1354965033_thumb.j

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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

×
×
  • 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.