The "No EQ" DSO Challenge!

[SteveNickolls]

1 hour ago, Nigel G said:

Its the Astronomik CLS CCD deep sky & Light pollution filter Canon clip fit.

It will work better with the modded camera.

I need to get a set of subs to see how it performs.

The write up says, Good with un modded , very good with modded cameras which is the reason I chose this one. With un modded camera there will be added contrast,

 

There is a loss of detail in the same exp time for sure. Hopefully not a waist of money!

Nige.

It will be very interesting to see how your filter performs with a target object Nige :-) Will you be doing a 'with' and 'without' filter for comparison?

I took delivery of a Baader Semi-Apo filter and 2" adapter for my refractor earlier this week which has some light pollution reduction value along with the at source fringe killing ability. Just need the clear night to use it now.

Regards,
Steve

 

[Filroden]

Version 2 of my recent NGC1333. I realised (seeing it on screen from the forum) that I'd left a bad gradient in the upper left and that the entire image still had a green cast (I missed that step). So I quickly reprocessed it and applied less noise reduction but hopefully improved the sharpening. I also cropped it back a little. Much of the remaining visible noise is actually in the chrominance layer but that's not surprising given how few RGB subs I managed to salvage. 

Edited October 28, 2016 by Filroden

[Yamez]

looking good so far, can't wait to see the finished image!

[Nigel G]

6 hours ago, SteveNickolls said:

It will be very interesting to see how your filter performs with a target object Nige :-) Will you be doing a 'with' and 'without' filter for comparison?

I took delivery of a Baader Semi-Apo filter and 2" adapter for my refractor earlier this week which has some light pollution reduction value along with the at source fringe killing ability. Just need the clear night to use it now.

Regards,
Steve

 

Steve, If I have enough time to do 2 sets then yes, Once my other camera is back in action, then I could do a side by side set up and have both clicking away with lenses on.

Then though I'd have to do 4 sets to see what the unmodded is like with and without and same for the modded.

Hopefully your sky's will be clear this weekend for a trial.

Cheers

Nige.

[Nigel G]

We could possibly do with a Alt-AZ imaging section, bit's I want to re read for information are difficult to find with 60 pages and 1500 posts.

I wonder if Admin would agree to a request?

Edited October 28, 2016 by Nigel G

[Stub Mandrel]

Can I suggest that what matters is not so  much the alt-az mount, but the short subs (up to 1-2 minutes).

Those who have a typical unguided EQ mount (like me) are essentially working with the same constraints as you Alt-Az imagers.

I reckon that 90%+ of this thread has been interesting to me and has kept my attention more than just about any other - so much so I started a thread for EQ3 imagers that hasn't take off in the same way. But I have felt unable to share my triumphs and tragedies as they are done with an EQ3 mount, despite my 'standard' exposure being 60s.

I would strongly support adding a section to the Imaging area for low-tech imaging as this is the realm of those of us (generally) working on relatively limited budgets. It would be a great place to direct beginners who often get the impression their kit isn't suitable for imaging anything other the Moon and the few DSOs you can see with the naked eye.

But it isn't a 'beginner' topic, as I am and intend to stick with short-exposure RGB imaging for the foreseeable future.

[Nigel G]

1 hour ago, Stub Mandrel said:

Can I suggest that what matters is not so  much the alt-az mount, but the short subs (up to 1-2 minutes).

Those who have a typical unguided EQ mount (like me) are essentially working with the same constraints as you Alt-Az imagers.

I reckon that 90%+ of this thread has been interesting to me and has kept my attention more than just about any other - so much so I started a thread for EQ3 imagers that hasn't take off in the same way. But I have felt unable to share my triumphs and tragedies as they are done with an EQ3 mount, despite my 'standard' exposure being 60s.

I would strongly support adding a section to the Imaging area for low-tech imaging as this is the realm of those of us (generally) working on relatively limited budgets. It would be a great place to direct beginners who often get the impression their kit isn't suitable for imaging anything other the Moon and the few DSOs you can see with the naked eye.

But it isn't a 'beginner' topic, as I am and intend to stick with short-exposure RGB imaging for the foreseeable future.

Good  point Neil,  short exposures or imaging on a low budget could cover more area, even then it can be split within if necessary. 

Nige.

[The Admiral]

2 hours ago, Nigel G said:

We could possibly do with a Alt-AZ imaging section, bit's I want to re read for information are difficult to find with 60 pages and 1500 posts.

I wonder if Admin would agree to a request?

 

2 hours ago, Stub Mandrel said:

Can I suggest that what matters is not so  much the alt-az mount, but the short subs (up to 1-2 minutes).

Those who have a typical unguided EQ mount (like me) are essentially working with the same constraints as you Alt-Az imagers.

I reckon that 90%+ of this thread has been interesting to me and has kept my attention more than just about any other - so much so I started a thread for EQ3 imagers that hasn't take off in the same way. But I have felt unable to share my triumphs and tragedies as they are done with an EQ3 mount, despite my 'standard' exposure being 60s.

I would strongly support adding a section to the Imaging area for low-tech imaging as this is the realm of those of us (generally) working on relatively limited budgets. It would be a great place to direct beginners who often get the impression their kit isn't suitable for imaging anything other the Moon and the few DSOs you can see with the naked eye.

But it isn't a 'beginner' topic, as I am and intend to stick with short-exposure RGB imaging for the foreseeable future.

This is something that Steve and I have discussed occasionally, and I'd be up for it. One of the things that prompted me was trying to find images that would reflect our 'art', and trying to find them interspersed in 60 pages is no mean feat. So I'd like to see a thread (? sub-forum) devoted to discussion and a separate gallery thread (or sub-forum) to which we only post the best of our images. That way there'd be a single vehicle that would allow beginners and others to see just what this mode of imaging can achieve, and hopefully dispel any myths about astro-photography with 'basic' equipment. The discussion thread could actually be sub-divided, for mounts and processing for example.

SM raises an interesting point in that the approaches used with Alt-Az imaging are equally applicable to using an EQ mount in its most basic form (apart from significant field rotation and altitude limits to accommodate). My only slight reservation I have is that using an Alt-Az mount is clearly distinct from using an EQ mount and is easily categorized as such. I'm not sure how one could categorize his EQ mount situation as it's more of a grey area, but if a suitable definition can be derived then it could be appropriate. Perhaps we would need separate sub-forums, one for Alt-Az and another for other forms of mount?

We already have a separate video astronomy section, so I don't see why one for our imaging approach shouldn't be instigated.

Just my 2d worth.

Ian

[Nigel G]

3 minutes ago, The Admiral said:

 

This is something that Steve and I have discussed occasionally, and I'd be up for it. One of the things that prompted me was trying to find images that would reflect our 'art', and trying to find them interspersed in 60 pages is no mean feat. So I'd like to see a thread (? sub-forum) devoted to discussion and a separate gallery thread (or sub-forum) to which we only post the best of our images. That way there'd be a single vehicle that would allow beginners and others to see just what this mode of imaging can achieve, and hopefully dispel any myths about astro-photography with 'basic' equipment. The discussion thread could actually be sub-divided, for mounts and processing for example.

SM raises an interesting point in that the approaches used with Alt-Az imaging are equally applicable to using an EQ mount in its most basic form (apart from significant field rotation and altitude limits to accommodate). My only slight reservation I have is that using an Alt-Az mount is clearly distinct from using an EQ mount and is easily categorized as such. I'm not sure how one could categorize his EQ mount situation as it's more of a grey area, but if a suitable definition can be derived then it could be appropriate. Perhaps we would need separate sub-forums, one for Alt-Az and another for other forms of mount?

We already have a separate video astronomy section, so I don't see why one for our imaging approach shouldn't be instigated.

Just my 2d worth.

Ian

I have requested a new topic in forum suggestions,  Alt-AZ and low budget,     to be in imaging.section.

It would be better to be able to organise the jumble of info in this thread.

Cheers 

Nige 

[Filroden]

I've often wondered if we needed more threads to cover what we discuss here but a few things always stop me from suggesting it:

Not many people are actively involved with posting about alt/az imaging. You'd have to think there are a lot more people on the forum to generate enough posts to make a sub-forum work.

We are probably our own worse nightmares because we mix a few different themes into a single post making it very long - maybe if we broke out this thread into a few posts focused on specific elements and these could be better located in existing sub-fora?

E.g.:

A getting started with alt/az imagery thread for the beginners sub-forum to share how we've used more basic equipment and some of the tips we've learnt that allow us to extend imaging times from when we started (<10s) to now (with Nige achieving 120s)

A processing alt/az imagery and how to use the tools we have to their best

A general alt/az discussion

A members gallery specifically for the best of Alt/Az imagery which could be linked from each of the posts

[Stub Mandrel]

I think the linking themes is that we are all essentially imaging in RGB at shorter exposures; it sits between video imaging and the extreme short exposure imagers and the 'serious' imagers guiding at 300 seconds up to ages, often as LRGB or narrowband  (which again is both quite specialised and needs a lot of technical stuff).

A new subject would be aimed at those who, essentially, use rigs that are equally suited to imaging and visual observation and whose priority is exploring the sky by getting 'presentable' images of lots of objects rather than spending many nights on the same target with half an eye on APOD :-)

[jimbo747]

58 minutes ago, Filroden said:

I've often wondered if we needed more threads to cover what we discuss here but a few things always stop me from suggesting it:

Not many people are actively involved with posting about alt/az imaging. You'd have to think there are a lot more people on the forum to generate enough posts to make a sub-forum work.

We are probably our own worse nightmares because we mix a few different themes into a single post making it very long - maybe if we broke out this thread into a few posts focused on specific elements and these could be better located in existing sub-fora?

E.g.:

A getting started with alt/az imagery thread for the beginners sub-forum to share how we've used more basic equipment and some of the tips we've learnt that allow us to extend imaging times from when we started (<10s) to now (with Nige achieving 120s)

A processing alt/az imagery and how to use the tools we have to their best

A general alt/az discussion

A members gallery specifically for the best of Alt/Az imagery which could be linked from each of the posts

 

A separate section would be superb, even its just for the gallery and techniques.

 

I've now finished building my budget remote controlled alt az observatory, got my full spec modded DSLR ready - intending on piggy backing on a mak with asi 224mc (and maybe a FR), just waiting for clear skies which looking at BBC maybe a few weeks. Not had chance to try 'first light', unless you count cloud, but I'm hoping to contribute a fair bit. My processing skills are limited so I'll be sharing my raw stack too. 

[Filroden]

It was supposed to be totally clear here all day and all night. But other than a 30 minute window where I could see Capella/Aldebran/Miflak, it's been 100% cloud cover all day  I guess I won't be adding to my NGC1333 tonight or even this weekend.

[Yamez]

Unexpected to be clear, forecast said clouds all night. Well it's wrong again and it is lovely outside just a little nippy.

Edited October 28, 2016 by Yamez

[jimbo747]

One quick question, I've seen some spectacular images done with 1 second subs on a huge fast scope with the 224mc.

How long an exposure would I need on my f/13 5" maksutov to be equivalent to say a 14" f/5 scope at 1 second exposure (ie same amount of photons captured on the target area)? Is there a formula?

[The Admiral]

12 hours ago, jimbo747 said:

One quick question, I've seen some spectacular images done with 1 second subs on a huge fast scope with the 224mc.

How long an exposure would I need on my f/13 5" maksutov to be equivalent to say a 14" f/5 scope at 1 second exposure (ie same amount of photons captured on the target area)? Is there a formula?

If I understand things correctly, the large 'scope will hoover up (14 squared)/(5 squared) more photons per second, i.e. ~7.9x faster. However, their respective focal lengths are important too, because the longer the focal length the more magnified the image is on the sensor, and therefore the lower the number of photons per pixel, which governs the sensitivity. However, in this particular case their focal lengths are very similar and so the image sizes on the sensors will be about the same. Hence the larger 'scope will throw ~ 7.9x more photons at each pixel than the smaller 'scope, assuming that the same camera is used. The smaller 'scope would therefore theoretically require ~ 7.9x more exposure. In fact, I believe the sensitivity will be inversely proportional to the square of the focal ratio, so actually the correct figure is 6.76x. That might not seem like a lot of difference if we are talking of 1s subs, but it's the difference between 1 hour total exposure and 6¾ hours total exposure!

I penned a short consideration of the factors involved, which I think is correct . I've attached it in case you are interested.

Ian

 

Is the F ratio Myth a Myth v3 .pdf

Edited October 29, 2016 by The Admiral
Hopefully improved the document

[The Admiral]

13 hours ago, Filroden said:

Not many people are actively involved with posting about alt/az imaging. You'd have to think there are a lot more people on the forum to generate enough posts to make a sub-forum work.

Not necessarily. This thread already has over 1500 posts and leads the field, never mind how many folk contribute. Also, by focusing on the subject and making it easier for our achievements to be seen, it may attract others into the fold who are teetering on the brink of doing astro-photography but are put off by the thought of what is supposedly required. Hopefully

Ian

 

[SteveNickolls]

Well the 'No EQ Challenge' thread is the second most viewed thread in the Getting Started With Imaging section with 36,491 current views and as Ian points out is the thread with the most replies so is a very active one especially for the number of people involved. Who could have imagined that what John (JHG1971) started back in October 2014 would continue to grow, and at pace to the present day?

As regards to having a separate section for our interests I was in the past unsure if it would pigeonhole Alt-Az imaging but I have now embraced the view that by setting up a dedicated area it allows the various components such as our images, equipment, techniques and guides to 'how to' or 'where to go' to be made more accessible to everyone and we can begin to lay down a store of knowledge that simply either didn't exist before or were certainly buried and often when uncovered were not linked as a whole.

The same factors that influence us imaging tonight and which brought Joseph Ashley to the point to write his book, 'Astro-photography on the Go Using Short Exposures with Light Mounts' remains a constant to every new, potential imager. Part of the answer comes down to daring to enschew the orthodoxy requiring the buying of very expensive equipment in order to try out imaging and instead to first 'dip their toes' using a low cost, portable, lightweight Alt-Az or EQ mount and telescope plus the family camera. For many people the choice boils down to either trying low cost imaging solution or not imaging at all. Developments in technology have helped permit low cost imaging and I see the future of highly sensitive CMOS cameras needing much shorter imaging times as further opening up imaging on lightweight mounts to more and more people.

Cheers,
Steve

Edited October 29, 2016 by SteveNickolls

[Nigel G]

21 minutes ago, SteveNickolls said:

Well the 'No EQ Challenge' thread is the second most viewed thread in the Getting Started With Imaging section with 36,491 current views and as Ian points out is the thread with the most replies so is a very active one especially for the number of people involved. Who could have imagined that what John (JHG1971) started back in October 2014 would continue to grow, and at pace to the present day?

As regards to having a separate section for our interests I was in the past unsure if it would pigeonhole Alt-Az imaging but I have now embraced the view that by setting up a dedicated area it allows the various components such as our images, equipment, techniques and guides to 'how to' or 'where to go' to be made more accessible to everyone and we can begin to lay down a store of knowledge that simply either didn't exist before or were certainly buried and often when uncovered were not linked as a whole.

The same factors that influence us imaging tonight and which brought Joseph Ashley to the point to write his book, 'Astro-photography on the Go Using Short Exposures with Light Mounts' remains a constant to every new, potential imager. Part of it comes down to daring to enschew the orthodoxy requiring the buying of very expensive equipment in order to try out imaging and instead to first 'dip their toes' using a low cost, portable, lightweight Alt-Az or EQ mount and telescope plus the family camera. For many people the choice boils down to either trying low cost imaging solution or not imaging at all. Developments in technology have helped permit low cost imaging and I see the future of highly sensitive CMOS cameras needing much shorter imaging times as further opening up imaging on lightweight mounts to more and more people.

Cheers,
Steve

Well said Steve.

Unfortunately admin do not seem that interested suggesting start a new thread.

Maybe I didn't explain in enough detail to get the point across. 

Hmm

Nige.

 

[MattJenko]

Been a while since I last visited this thread. My it has come along. Here is my recent foray into AltAz imaging. It is a 6 minute M15 using lucky DSO imaging techniques. It is an RGB image with each channel being a 2 minute video of 1 second subs (well a 10 minute video with just the best 20% of frames used). 250px newtonian on an AzEQ6 in Az mode with a ZWO ASI1600Mono camera.

Aligned/stacked in AutoStakkert, combined and polished in PixInsight. It is cropped, as the aligning in Autostakkert is the least well executed part of the process and the edges were a right old mess, and you can still see issues with this aspect of the processing. It seems promising for a first effort to me though.

 

[Filroden]

With such a low read noise it's going to be interesting seeing what can be achieved with 1000s of 1s shots. Though I can't imagine how long it would take to stack!

 

[Stub Mandrel]

55 minutes ago, SteveNickolls said:

Part of the answer comes down to daring to enschew the orthodoxy requiring the buying of very expensive equipment in order to try out imaging and instead to first 'dip their toes' using a low cost, portable, lightweight Alt-Az or EQ mount and telescope plus the family camera. For many people the choice boils down to either trying low cost imaging solution or not imaging at all.

HEAR! HEAR!

[The Admiral]

46 minutes ago, MattJenko said:

Been a while since I last visited this thread. My it has come along. Here is my recent foray into AltAz imaging. It is a 6 minute M15 using lucky DSO imaging techniques. It is an RGB image with each channel being a 2 minute video of 1 second subs (well a 10 minute video with just the best 20% of frames used). 250px newtonian on an AzEQ6 in Az mode with a ZWO ASI1600Mono camera.

Aligned/stacked in AutoStakkert, combined and polished in PixInsight. It is cropped, as the aligning in Autostakkert is the least well executed part of the process and the edges were a right old mess, and you can still see issues with this aspect of the processing. It seems promising for a first effort to me though.

 

I agree it is a promising first effort. There's plenty of star colour there and with 250mm at your disposal you should capture a lot of photons at good resolution. Any reason why you went for such short subs? Is this within what one might call video astronomy? My guess is the definition becomes a bit blurred here.

Ian

[SteveNickolls]

4 hours ago, Nigel G said:

Well said Steve.

Unfortunately admin do not seem that interested suggesting start a new thread.

Maybe I didn't explain in enough detail to get the point across. 

Hmm

Nige.

 

Hi Nige,

Thanks for all you have done on this. Much appreciated. I take it they won't/can't create a new forum title under which we can have a series of threads? Is it a lot of trouble? When at work I had rights to make new content and it could be done all the time. Don't like a tail wagging a dog even if it's a voluntary tail.

Did admin say why not? Do they feel it is covered by other topics albeit in a piecemeal, shotgun way? Can we make a case for an addition? I understand Video Astronomy had a topic opened for them some while ago. Maybe they don't, respectfully, appreciate the subject and the nuances of Alt-Az imaging and those short exposures that lie between the othodoxy EQ and EAA. 

The alternative, to start a series of threads under a specific forum division like Beginners, or more appropriately Imaging while an option would not be cohesive and runs the obvious risk of being lost as new posts on other threads arise.

The popularity of the 'No EQ Challenge' evidences the interest of the SGL membership and wider public accessing the forum and ought to be weighed by admin in coming to a decision. Nowadays decisions ought to be done in an open and fair way and against open rules and not behind closed doors or reflect the impulse of one or more person with decision making power. No inappropriateness is implied of course just my view of openness, fairness and accountability.

Cheers,

Steve

Edited October 29, 2016 by SteveNickolls

[SteveNickolls]

3 hours ago, Filroden said:

With such a low read noise it's going to be interesting seeing what can be achieved with 1000s of 1s shots. Though I can't imagine how long it would take to stack!

 

At least x50 dark frames wouldn't take long to perform, always a silver lining somewhere.

Cheers,
Steve