Jump to content

Stargazers Lounge Uses Cookies

Like most websites, SGL uses cookies in order to deliver a secure, personalised service, to provide social media functions and to analyse our traffic. Continued use of SGL indicates your acceptance of our cookie policy.

sgl_imaging_challenge_banner_30_second_exp_2_winners.thumb.jpg.b5430b40547c40d344fd4493776ab99f.jpg

peroni

Another - what causes this?

Recommended Posts

I was out the other night even though the cloud was thick: Desperate to grab a few shots I turned to the moon. The image below is a single frame taken using a 460ex mono. No filter used. Exposure was 0.001 sec. No binning.

A simply auto stretch was applied in PixInsight, no other processing.

What has caused the strange lighting effect?

Is it IR reflection as I haven't used an IR filter?

post-15911-0-03886500-1450713878_thumb.p

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Looks like it is simply glare, maybe a slight misalignment between camera and scope or the reflection through the tube.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It isn't glare, it's electronic. Your CCD has anti blooming gates which stop bright stars producing bleed lines running vertically downwards from them. 'Scientific' CCDs don't have these and give a more linear response but do give bleed lines from bright sources. The moon is so bright that the anti blooming is being defeated. I've always found this when I've tried to use a deep sky CCD camera on the moon. You could try an Ha filter. This would not only block a lot of the incident light but the surviving light would be of long wavelength and less distorted by the seeing. After that you could try an aperture mask. You simply have too much light for the camera which is, after all, optimized for capturing the almost lightless objects out there! I have to say that, while I've seen this quite a few times, I've never been minded to try very hard to overcome it and never have. I've always settled for a fast frame camera on my rare lunar excursions.

Olly

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's interesting, Olly. I never knew that!

Most people use webcams or dedicated planetary cams for the Moon and planets as they're so bright. These cams take vids made up of short exposures which you then stack in, say, Registax. Or you can use a DSLR, especially if it has video mode, but stills can be very successful too.

Alexxx

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You could try turning down the ISO setting on your DSLR, so that you actually get an under exposure. Even when I shoot the moon through a normal lens I would chose a maximum of 400 ASA, preferably 100 ASA and at least 1/400th at f11. Through a scope I would be down at 1/4000th at 25 ASA. If I could. If not. Maximum shutter speed with the lowest ASA number and then use the +/- to take it at least to -2 under expose. If it's too dark try adjusting it back a bit.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You could try turning down the ISO setting on your DSLR, so that you actually get an under exposure. Even when I shoot the moon through a normal lens I would chose a maximum of 400 ASA, preferably 100 ASA and at least 1/400th at f11. Through a scope I would be down at 1/4000th at 25 ASA. If I could. If not. Maximum shutter speed with the lowest ASA number and then use the +/- to take it at least to -2 under expose. If it's too dark try adjusting it back a bit.

The camera in use is not a DSLR ...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It isn't glare, it's electronic. Your CCD has anti blooming gates which stop bright stars producing bleed lines running vertically downwards from them. 'Scientific' CCDs don't have these and give a more linear response but do give bleed lines from bright sources. The moon is so bright that the anti blooming is being defeated. I've always found this when I've tried to use a deep sky CCD camera on the moon. You could try an Ha filter. This would not only block a lot of the incident light but the surviving light would be of long wavelength and less distorted by the seeing. After that you could try an aperture mask. You simply have too much light for the camera which is, after all, optimized for capturing the almost lightless objects out there! I have to say that, while I've seen this quite a few times, I've never been minded to try very hard to overcome it and never have. I've always settled for a fast frame camera on my rare lunar excursions.

Olly

Phew! I thought I had a serious equipment failure on my hands. I was using my ED80 scope with the aperture reducer on the front (the cover with the 50mm smaller opening). With all these cloudy nights I just wanted to photograph something. The evening wasn't wasted though. 

I've now learned that a 460ex without filters is not good as a lunar camera  :icon_biggrin:

That's interesting, Olly. I never knew that!

Most people use webcams or dedicated planetary cams for the Moon and planets as they're so bright. These cams take vids made up of short exposures which you then stack in, say, Registax. Or you can use a DSLR, especially if it has video mode, but stills can be very successful too.

Alexxx

I do have guide camera which I could use. Just never quite got round to it yet. So many targets to choose and so few good, clear nights.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.