legion48 Posted January 8, 2008 Share Posted January 8, 2008 I was trying to image M31 last night and was very disappointed with what the screen was showing during the capture. After processing refused to show anything at all like M31, I'm beginning to think I was actually imaging M110. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CELESCOPE Posted January 8, 2008 Share Posted January 8, 2008 Hmmm still looks like M31 to me LG ,i could be wrong , its how it would look before processing with short exposures. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SteveL Posted January 8, 2008 Share Posted January 8, 2008 After processing refused to show anything at all like M31, I'm beginning to think I was actually imaging M110. i`m still not sure either... in some ways it fits, in other it doesnt. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andrew* Posted January 8, 2008 Share Posted January 8, 2008 In all honesty, I don't think it looks like either, studying SteveL's diagram.Some capture info would help to determine the actual FOV we're looking at here...Anyway, sorry to hear of the disappointment. That's the story of my astrophotography attempts! CheersAndrew Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sam Posted January 8, 2008 Share Posted January 8, 2008 I'm thinking M32 - very hard to tell though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
steppenwolf Posted January 8, 2008 Share Posted January 8, 2008 My first thought was that this was indeed M31 but we really need to know the FOV to be sure. What CCD/Telescope/Barlow (if any) did you use for this image and have you cropped it horizontally or just vertically? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
legion48 Posted January 8, 2008 Author Share Posted January 8, 2008 My first thought was that this was indeed M31 but we really need to know the FOV to be sure. What CCD/Telescope/Barlow (if any) did you use for this image and have you cropped it horizontally or just vertically?I think it's cropped a bit all round. I used a Toucam SC1, no barlow, on the F5 Nexstar. I'm at work at the mo. but I'll post an uncropped, unprocessed frame later. I think the posted image matches SteveL's insert on his M31 image (great pic BTW!). What is the insert of Steve? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
steppenwolf Posted January 8, 2008 Share Posted January 8, 2008 Got it! Positive ID on core of M31:-Extracted from the centre of this image taken in September 2006 blown up 400% with 'levels' reduced greatly:- Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CELESCOPE Posted January 8, 2008 Share Posted January 8, 2008 Hurray i thought it was , Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
legion48 Posted January 8, 2008 Author Share Posted January 8, 2008 Thanks for the help in ID'ing the image guys. Unfortunately it leaves me in the unenviable position of the poster of the lamest DSO in SGL's history. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CELESCOPE Posted January 8, 2008 Share Posted January 8, 2008 ah noo not really LG it takes me back does that , when i started thats all i was getting in my exposures, its a learning curve , we want to see images like this ,then those of us that have been imaging a while can give guidence , it will come , take your time , its not as easy as some may think , but keeping at it taking good info from others and you will be knocking them out .just remember, low cost imaging will need alot more work , take alook at my web site , and view the images with the atik 2hs , NOT THE 16HR and you can see what you can achieve with a mere web cam albeit modded.www.rwnewastro.co.uk, most all the lunar are with it and loads of my early DSOs Rog Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.