Jump to content

Banner.jpg.b83b14cd4142fe10848741bb2a14c66b.jpg

M1 & Horsehead

Advertise

By Advertise
in Imaging - Deep Sky

Recommended Posts

Advertise

Advertise

Posted
Posted

What a lovley weekend.

First real imaging time I had since early October. :)

I captured 2 objects.

First out is M1.

20x4min with Darks bias and flats.

post-20354-0-10940200-1362385001_thumb.p

Second.

Horsehead nebula.

17x5min with Darks bias and flats.

post-20354-0-53764200-1362385083_thumb.p

Both taken with:

Scope: Skywatcher ED80

Mount: EQ5 GoTo

Camera: unmodded 1100d

Filter: Astronomik 1.25" CLS

Guided

Locaction: Malmo, Sweden

Criticism, comments and tips are very much welcome. :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Welrod50

Welrod50

Posted
Posted

I have to say I do like these, but am particularly impressed with M1. I took a single unguided sub of M1 myself (at 4 minutes) the other night just to see what the camera would record. There was minimal start trailing considering I was unguided which was cool. However, what was far less cool was the barely discernable faint blob that my camera captured.

Well done ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Advertise

Advertise

Posted
  • Author
Posted

Thank you both of you for those kind words. :)

Gina: Btw Gina. Just cheking if you know this. :)

I read somewhere (Can´t really remember where) that you had diminishing returns on the number of images.

Like first 10 makes huge difference. Next 10 is "meh" and after that you hardly see any difference.

Is there any truth in this? Or does it perhaps any apply to longer exposure times or something like that?

Welro40:

Well my raws of M1 was just a very very faint blob aswell. But the magic of stacking and PS got it out. :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Welrod50

Welrod50

Posted
Posted

Welro40:

Well my raws of M1 was just a very very faint blob aswell. But the magic of stacking and PS got it out. :)

Really! I didn't think I would have nearly enough data even if I stacked thirty of what I got. I shall have to re-visit this next clear night then! Nice one ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites
JamesF

JamesF

Posted
Posted

There are diminishing returns as you stack more frames, but where you reach the point of there being no value in adding more depends on the quality of the data you're stacking (and how you define "no value").

James

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Advertise

Advertise

Posted
  • Author
Posted

There are diminishing returns as you stack more frames, but where you reach the point of there being no value in adding more depends on the quality of the data you're stacking (and how you define "no value").

James

Ahh I see! Thanks!

Then I guess that kinda only applies to highend CCDs in any practical way?

Especially not from a lightpolluted locaction.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Gina

Gina

Posted
Posted

Thank you both of you for those kind words. :)

Gina: Btw Gina. Just cheking if you know this. :)

I read somewhere (Can´t really remember where) that you had diminishing returns on the number of images.

Like first 10 makes huge difference. Next 10 is "meh" and after that you hardly see any difference.

Is there any truth in this? Or does it perhaps any apply to longer exposure times or something like that?

The more image time the better as I understand it.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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

Go to topic listing

  • 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.