Jump to content

Stargazers Lounge Uses Cookies

Like most websites, SGL uses cookies in order to deliver a secure, personalised service, to provide social media functions and to analyse our traffic. Continued use of SGL indicates your acceptance of our cookie policy.

sgl_2019_sp_banner.thumb.jpg.a0ff260c05b90dead5c594e9b4ee9fd0.jpg

Matt Scunthorpe

First image (ever)

Recommended Posts

Having received a RA motor for Christmas, i thought i would try a spot of photography.

M42

Single 30sec exposure

ISO 400

post-21702-0-19742000-1356825660_thumb.j

This is JPG taken on a Sony Alpha, the original photo was taken in raw format, but I'm having trouble finding software that will convert Sony raw files (.AWR) into .tiffs, anyone use an alpha and know of anything?

Thanks for reading :)

Edited by Matt Scunthorpe
  • Like 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

that s excellent for a 1st attempt! and a single 30 secs of data!!! imagine that data times say 100 30sec subs :) thats when the addiction kicks in lool

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well that did occur to me when it started clouding over and started packing up and thought i haven't even had an EP in the scope yet... Had a quick look at Jupiter just to make sure i did some observing ;)

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

at least you got 30secs more imaging then me tonight loool!!! it looked clear so i set up aligned then BAM! clouds grhhh then rain lol :( you gotta love this hobby :D

cant wait to see more of your pics when we get the chance :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well i did shoot this star field (was the only part of the sky with no clouds at this point lol) quite happy with how it came out. I just need to get my head around stacking software and what tweaks to do when i get the chance to advance a bit

.post-21702-0-79994100-1356829004_thumb.j

Im just glad i managed to get a start on this, and am happy with the results i got.

Edited by Matt Scunthorpe
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And it knocks the socks of my efforts tonight. I had a couple of hours of clearish skies and totally screwed up.

Well done Matt.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Matt, that's pretty good for a single sub! Nice one :)

As for your Sony Alpha RAWS, which model alpha is it? You should find RAW support with photoshop elements. Version 11 is just out, but if your camera is a slightly older model, you may find an erlier version will support it. Costs in the region of £60 - £70 usually. And it will be great to use for normal photos too.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Am I right in thinking the A230 has been out for a couple of years?? If so you may well find Elements 10 will fit the bill. Adobe should tell you for sure. May even be supported in Elements 9?!

But if you chose to stretch a bit more to the newest release, you would be a bit more future proof. Doesn't matter for me though. I use Elements 8, but it does .PNG files from my Pentax Kx although it can also shoot in the Adobe .DNG RAW format and these files will open with even earlier Elements programs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Im not really sure how old it is to be honest. I bought it maybe a year ago as my first DSLR and didnt want to payout for a nikon or canon label when i was totally new to photography

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

GIMP - free & open source should cope with them. I've got an A200 and it works for me. Also have Photoshop Elements 8 which will open them too.

Lee

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Excellent stuff. Really interesting contribution Matt.

What strikes me is that all the fantastic and beautiful shots that one sees through multiple shots being stacked and then processed means that you can't really decide how much processing has affected what can be observed.

If this is a single 30-second shot "right out of the can" then it brings out quite a bit of the colour of M42 without tweaking.

Question: could you detect any of that colour visually using the same scope if you allowed your eyes to get accustomed to the dark for long enough?

- Tony

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Excellent stuff. Really interesting contribution Matt.

What strikes me is that all the fantastic and beautiful shots that one sees through multiple shots being stacked and then processed means that you can't really decide how much processing has affected what can be observed.

If this is a single 30-second shot "right out of the can" then it brings out quite a bit of the colour of M42 without tweaking.

Question: could you detect any of that colour visually using the same scope if you allowed your eyes to get accustomed to the dark for long enough?

- Tony

Some people see hints of green in the nebula, but i never have.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I feel it looks a bit blueish, particularly compared to M31 which is distinctly yellower, but that's as far as it goes.

And great image. Looks a whole lot better than my first (and so far only) astro image.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Great job, lots of information in there. Add a few more minutes of data+ darks/flats and you got a real cracking picture after processing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Very good, yet to step into the Dark Side but I'd be happy to get those results on my first foray :-)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Very good, yet to step into the Dark Side but I'd be happy to get those results on my first foray :-)

I always thought that as well when i looked at other peoples first attempts. All i did was copy what id seen people do on here, time of exposure, which ISO to use etc. I still dont really understand how the ISO works to be honest though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

ISO used to relate to sensitivity of film media - the higher the ISO the more sensitive the film was but the more grained and noisy the resultant image was. The same is somewhat true of digital imaging but I don't know why, nor how the ISO setting on a digital camera actually affects the photon gathering process. I'm certain someone more knowledgable will be along soon to elaborate! ;-)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.