Lunar image via 680nm filter

[nightvision]

My first lunar image, took a few last year but didn't have a proper mount for the ED100 so gave up. Tried again last night - 22/05 - (inspired by Dan's 'long_arms' Langrenus thread and use of IR filter) using a cheap and overloaded AZ mount meant the scope was blowing about in the wild conditions and it was freezing!

Moon at about 22 degrees altitude and at around 2215 the sky was still quite bright.

Set up and processing:

680nm infrared filter taped to the front of the ED100 focus tube (I have a selection IR filters for daytime IR photography)

Canon 1000d with full-spectrum mod

Focused via Live-view

1/10 of a second exposure at ISO100

Custom white balance applied to change the moon from bright orange

1 exposure selected from 110 (I don't know how to use Registax yet, looks very complex)

PSP5: Blue channel and Yellow channel with a CRMY mix to reduce noise and raise contrast

Finished in Gimp

I intend to try a deeper IR filter next (850nm) but this will likely need a very long exposure so might not work out without tracking.

[Steve Ward]

Interesting result ,

Give JamesF's tutorial a look see to get you started with stacking , you'll definitely see a difference. . . http://stargazerslounge.com/topic/184192-full-disc-lunar-imaging-with-a-dslr/

[nightvision]

Thanks Steve, I was searching for that sort of thing earlier, yes I have seen JamesF's lunar images, very impressive resolution. I did try to use it but I just ended up with a mess.

[Steve Ward]

Practice makes perfect . . . it'll soon become second nature .

[fwm891]

Good result whatever

[michael.h.f.wilkinson]

Very nice image. It will be interesting to see what IR does in comparison.

[nightvision]

Very nice image. It will be interesting to see what IR does in comparison.

Hi Michael, I believe the filter effects I see in the daytime apply to lunar imaging; cuts through haze and removes the blue of the sky making it darker which is good for a light summers evening sky, also near-IR doesn't get scattered by the atmosphere to the same extent as visible light.

I don't have any non IR images from the night to compare. Looking at the colour channels the blue has very little detail, green is contrasty and sharp and red is very sharp and high contrast, if I check it out in CYMK then yellow looks just like the blue in RGB.

I have found a better single shot and got PS up and running so I will post another IR image later.

[michael.h.f.wilkinson]

Hi Michael, I believe the filter effects I see in the daytime apply to lunar imaging; cuts through haze and removes the blue of the sky making it darker which is good for a light summers evening sky, also near-IR doesn't get scattered by the atmosphere to the same extent as visible light.

I don't have any non IR images from the night to compare. Looking at the colour channels the blue has very little detail, green is contrasty and sharp and red is very sharp and high contrast, if I check it out in CYMK then yellow looks just like the blue in RGB.

I have found a better single shot and got PS up and running so I will post another IR image later.

Seeing is also considerably less in IR than in visible.

[nightvision]

Seeing is also considerably less in IR than in visible.

If you mean things are a little better then I agree, I was surprised (with the moon so low) that I got 6 crystal clear images and about 25 very good images. I think the filter is also providing a narrow band view and reducing the chance of adjacent wavelengths effecting the image quality. There was a definite pattern of good and bad seeing, had time to go through the images today and I could predict when they would improve, the blue channel was consistently the worse performer in terms of resolution. Need to use tracking and try a deeper (and darker) filter but then I'll probably reach a trade-off point; where the longer exposures exceed the good seeing window... ...well that's astro-imaging for you...

Seeing image by: Philipp Salzgeber

[michael.h.f.wilkinson]

If you mean things are a little better then I agree, I was surprised (with the moon so low) that I got 6 crystal clear images and about 25 very good images. I think the filter is also providing a narrow band view and reducing the chance of adjacent wavelengths effecting the image quality. There was a definite pattern of good and bad seeing, had time to go through the images today and I could predict when they would improve, the blue channel was consistently the worse performer in terms of resolution. Need to use tracking and try a deeper (and darker) filter but then I'll probably reach a trade-off point; where the longer exposures exceed the good seeing window... ...well that's astro-imaging for you...

Seeing image by: Philipp Salzgeber

You are absolutely right, I meant to say less of a problem

[JamesF]

For a single frame I think that's a very good image. Seeing how fifty or sixty might look after stacking and sharpening would be very interesting.

James

[nightvision]

For a single frame I think that's a very good image. Seeing how fifty or sixty might look after stacking and sharpening would be very interesting.

James

Thanks, I referenced your 'how to' thread and tried unsuccessfully to PIPP and Registax about 60 but they were all over the frame (unguided cheap AZ mount) output looked like stormy Neptune , once I get the 6 set up in an obsy there will be plenty of stacking. I found several frames which are slightly better.

[nightvision]

This image was from about 30 minutes earlier, monochrome from the red channel only:

[t_ilan_s]

Both images are very good!

For only one frame this is a fantastic result!

[Superdavo]

Nice image!