Quick crap M42 and Running Man

[Andrew*]

Bad idea. I had about an hour of free time and clear skies, so I intended to do a heads up between the 1-HS and 2-HS on horsehead while it was still there.

This didn't happen. I wasn't organised and lots had to be done and I had numerous hindrances. Finally I had a nicely focused M42 and 1977 (forget horsehead!) on the screen with about 20 minutes to go. I decided to instead illustrate the difference a CLS filter makes instead of bothering with 2 cameras. Got some nice 1 minute subs with and without, so tried to go for 2 minutes. M42 was very low, and hazy cloud meant all these are for the bin. Time was up and I got very little data.

camera: Atik 2-HS and CLS filter

scope: ED80 at f/3.25

exposure: 5x1 mins.

(click to enlarge)

Still, I got an image and learnt more lessons (this is what it's all about, right?) so I guess it wasn't all for nothing :?

Andrew

[MartinB]

That's worked out alright Andrew. Nice to see someone using an Atik 2HS. I have very fond memories of that camera

[Andrew*]

Thanks Martin,

Here's different data processed differently which appears much better. Still can't get any kind of running man. I think this is without the CLS filter.

(click to enlarge)

Andrew

[Tim]

that sounds about like my night.

Also hoping to try out my new CLS filter! And newly modded 350d.

Got set up nice n early, all ready to go at M81 before the moon came up, and kicked out the power lead to the mount. Had to realign twice after this under clear skies, just as that got sorted the clouds rolled in.

Completely abortive, but like you I learnt a few lessons...

TJ

[trudie]

Considering the lousy weather, I would say that is a superb result, nice one.

Trudie

[Andrew*]

Thanks trudie

Can anyone tell me why when I open a bmp of this image in photoshop the quality goes really awful? I want to do some post-processing on it, but as soon as I open the file, it's irretrievably worse than before :?

Andrew

[barkis]

Nothing to criticise yourself for Andrew, you got what was possible under the conditions you were working.

The images are fine, and nothing to beat yourself up over.

No one doubts you're heading in the right direction.

I think Bitmap images are a low bit count, and pixilate badly when blown up.

I think that is correct, but don't quote me.

Ron.

[Sam]

Given the conditions Andrew that is a very good result. With M43/43 being so ow on the horizon now it's going to be pretty tough to get a reasonable look. Well done!

Sam

[RobH]

Well done Andrew, at least you managed to get something despite the circumstances

Cheers

Rob

[MikeD]

Nice job, the 2nd one gets my vote.

Mike.

[Andrew*]

Thanks all.

I don't think I can get both M42 and running man with this set-up. The running man is almost as big as M42 itself.

Appreciate the comments. That's probably the last M42 this session eh? I'll miss it.

Andrew

[Sam]

I think many people will miss M42 as it's such a great sight and so easy to see.

[CELESCOPE]

Hey you done ok there Andrew , nice to see my ole faithfull in action again , good image mate , and yes all imaging now are good for picking up pointers etc , i would go for around 45 ot 60 subs i never done less that 40 , that way it does give you more chance of pulling detail out, but a very good start indeed ,

Rog

[Andrew*]

Rog, I'm sure to love this camera and stick with it until I've mastered this tricky art - thank you so much!

My tracking appears to be quite good for 2 minutes on this wide field, which makes me quite hopeful

I was silly to plump for M42. My RDF on the ED80 wasn't aligned and has power issues, so I should have worked with these and gone for a more sensible target. By the end of the session, the 2-min subs showed less detail than the 1-min subs because of altitude and cloud

Andrew