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_2019_sp_banner.thumb.jpg.a0ff260c05b90dead5c594e9b4ee9fd0.jpg

Luis Campos

M51 and M66 with ASI 120MM (lucky imaging)

Recommended Posts

Hi guys,

 

This was my fisrt time using the little ASI 120MM for deep sky stuff, inspired by Emil Kraikaamp's work with "lucky imaging" I decided to give it a go from my urban back yard with the 300mm newtonian and EQ6, these are M51 and M66 galaxies shoot with 5 sec. subs with no filters at all:

 

M51, 268x5 secs:

 

M51 268x5 sec arithmetic combine_test 1

 

 

M66, 145x5 secs:

 

M66 145x5 sec arithmetic combine_test 1

 

 

 

Never mind the dirty background, it needs a lot more frames to clean it, but the details on the galaxies really shocked me :o

 

I think one of the newer generation cameras with very low read noise and lower banding would be really nice for this type of imaging!

 

Cheers,

  • Like 23

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Superb results there, very interesting, especially for approx 22 minutes of exposures.

thanks for sharing

Bill

Edited by RuralBill
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

wow amazing for such short image time. But why just 5 sec subs, surely the EQ6 should be able to provide longer exposures than that.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Many thanks for the kind words :)

The goal of using very short exposures is the same as with palnetary imaging (lucky imaging) this is the key to get sharper details, but with this you will need many subs to increase that S/N ratio, next time I'll aim for at least 1000 of them ;)

Cheers,

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Very interesting what software did you use to capture? I have a QHY5L is that the same chip?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Very impressive indeed... :).   I was literally just talking about this new type of "lucky DSO imaging" to someone else... Now, if someone could come up with one of these new-breed CMOS chips with an integral filterwheel and OAG, I'd be REALLY interested!   (That new ZWO 1600 for example...? :))

The only query I really have at the moment is what laptop you'd ideally need, not only for capture (presumably USB3!), but also for processing - I think I saw one image from Emil Kraaikamp had 3600 exposures... My laptop would take longer to stack that lot than it would to capture it(!), but there's no denying that you can get a lot of very good detail with this method...

Just as a matter of interest, can I ask what software you used to stack... (and what spec your PC/laptop is... and how long it took to stack these?)

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank guys! :)

The capture sofware is Firecapture, same as for planetary imaging, not sure if it's the same chip as on the QHY5L, this one is an Aptina 1/3″ CMOS MT9M034 (monochrome).

Andy, funny I was just looking for info on that new ZWO 1600, it sure looks promissing, I've seen some really nice results even in narrowband and the price point seems very correct :) I think we are seeing a new revolution in amateur astrophotography!

I'm also not sure if USB3 is required, my laptop is quite old and running the spectacular...not windows Vista home edition, with the ASI 120MM I use IRIS to align and stack and it's lightning fast no issues here, a single tiff file from the ASI is just 2.3 mb :)

Cheers,

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

I think we are seeing a new revolution in amateur astrophotography!

I'm certainly going to keep an eye on this "lucky imaging" method...  I've not tried IRIS, but if it's not causing much issue for you with 268 x 2.3Mb files, and that on a Vista machine, then that's gotta be good news :).  Mind you, that ZWO 1600 has a chip similar in size to an 8300, and at 16Mb each, a thousand of those might take a little longer.  However, obviously Emil Kraaikamp has no such issues, so I guess I'm probably worrying about nothing!

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I Think they're great little cameras, I've got one but never used it for deep sky but am always amazed at the level of detail they show. Great images

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Very nice! I've done the same with my QHY5L-II-M. It's the same chip as far as i know. I gained quite a bit of sharpness in my M51 pic after adding the light from the QHY5L, and ever since i've been using it more and more for deep sky. 

Curious though, since you're one of the few who use this sensor for deep sky - i keep having issues with long exposures with the QHY5L. Occasionally, the top and bottom of frames get significantly brighter, ruining the pictures. It seems to happen more and more often the longer exposures i have, and it's regardless of capturing program. Usually 1-60 exposures work fine, and sometimes 1-5 min works, but any more then that and it's almost a 100% loss (as in, all frames ruined). Ever had that issue with the ASI120? Trying to figure out if it's a sensor issue or an issue with QHY. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/5/2016 at 11:32, symesie04 said:

wow amazing for such short image time. But why just 5 sec subs, surely the EQ6 should be able to provide longer exposures than that.

As Luis says, the whole point is to beat the seeing with many short subs. And, goodness me, it works.

 

This is a fascinating new approach. Your core details in M66 (the most beautiful galaxy in the sky?) are sensational. What's going through my mind when I see these results is that they are fabulous for bright and highly detailed parts of an image but they don't go very deep. So why not use this approach to pull out details where details are needed and add them to deep long exposures where depth is needed? Best of both worlds.

Luis, Noel Carboni's actions have a 'reduce vertical banding' routine which is incredibly effective and comes at no cost to the rest of the image in most cases.

Olly

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Like you I have also been following Emil Kraikaamp's work...and you have done well here with less than 1/2 hour's exposure!

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, Jannis said:

Very nice! I've done the same with my QHY5L-II-M. It's the same chip as far as i know. I gained quite a bit of sharpness in my M51 pic after adding the light from the QHY5L, and ever since i've been using it more and more for deep sky. 

Curious though, since you're one of the few who use this sensor for deep sky - i keep having issues with long exposures with the QHY5L. Occasionally, the top and bottom of frames get significantly brighter, ruining the pictures. It seems to happen more and more often the longer exposures i have, and it's regardless of capturing program. Usually 1-60 exposures work fine, and sometimes 1-5 min works, but any more then that and it's almost a 100% loss (as in, all frames ruined). Ever had that issue with the ASI120? Trying to figure out if it's a sensor issue or an issue with QHY. 

Hi Jannis,

Many thanks mate :)

Indeed it's possible to do "hibrid" images by placing the galaxie's cores on another wider filed image taken with a DSLR or a bigger CCD chip :)

I also get that behavoir ocasionally, it seems that the amplifier glow gets more pronounced in some frames and I also don't know why...although on these last sessions I hardly had that problem, sometimes it happens sometimes it doesn't...anyways when it does I just remove the bad frames ( I sort them manually).

Cheers,

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, ollypenrice said:

As Luis says, the whole point is to beat the seeing with many short subs. And, goodness me, it works.

 

This is a fascinating new approach. Your core details in M66 (the most beautiful galaxy in the sky?) are sensational. What's going through my mind when I see these results is that they are fabulous for bright and highly detailed parts of an image but they don't go very deep. So why not use this approach to pull out details where details are needed and add them to deep long exposures where depth is needed? Best of both worlds.

Luis, Noel Carboni's actions have a 'reduce vertical banding' routine which is incredibly effective and comes at no cost to the rest of the image in most cases.

Olly

Hello Olly,

Yes it is :)

Folks (including me) are getting really excited about this new generation of very low read noise and high sensitivity cameras, I see the new ASI 1600 waiving at me but I'll be waiting to see some results first, I've already seen some extremelly impressive stuff in narrowband with 20 sec. subs...that's ridiculous!

But as you say I'm not sure if these cameras can pull out those very faint detail and color gradations, that's were my doubt is right now. As for the technic for blending these high resolution images to extract details from galaxies and other samller targets, yes it's indeed a great thing, with layer masks we can have the best of both worlds :)

Cheers,

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, ultranova said:

Looking good luis, loving the detail

well done

Paul

Thank you Paul :)

More testing needed....if only it stops raining!!! AAArrrghhhhh!!!

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, StuartJPP said:

Like you I have also been following Emil Kraikaamp's work...and you have done well here with less than 1/2 hour's exposure!

Thank you Stuart,

Emil has some really impressive stuff and with a dob on a tracking platform :) Coolness

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, Luis Campos said:

Hello Olly,

Yes it is :)

Folks (including me) are getting really excited about this new generation of very low read noise and high sensitivity cameras, I see the new ASI 1600 waiving at me but I'll be waiting to see some results first, I've already seen some extremelly impressive stuff in narrowband with 20 sec. subs...that's ridiculous!

But as you say I'm not sure if these cameras can pull out those very faint detail and color gradations, that's were my doubt is right now. As for the technic for blending these high resolution images to extract details from galaxies and other samller targets, yes it's indeed a great thing, with layer masks we can have the best of both worlds :)

Cheers,

Are you referring to these?

Until I saw these images, I thought as Olly, that the cameras were fine for brighter DSOs. There was a lack of deep images taken with these cameras. The cameras also seemed to suffer from high dark current (& noise) and amp glow, even the cooled versions. But development is so fast on these cameras, that I think we will see more DSOs with faint details very soon.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, wimvb said:

Are you referring to these?

Until I saw these images, I thought as Olly, that the cameras were fine for brighter DSOs. There was a lack of deep images taken with these cameras. The cameras also seemed to suffer from high dark current (& noise) and amp glow, even the cooled versions. But development is so fast on these cameras, that I think we will see more DSOs with faint details very soon.

Exactly! :)

Yes, I just read that they are adressing the amp glow issue. a new driver has just been relaesed and eliminates much of the amp glow, as you say we are going to see more faint deep sky objects very soon ;)

 

Cheers,

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Yes, I just read that they are adressing the amp glow issue. a new driver has just been relaesed and eliminates much of the amp glow, as you say we are going to see more faint deep sky objects very soon ;)

Ooooh! I wonder if this will be the case for the QHY5L too then maybe. Same chip, so it's possible? It's really the only reason why i haven't used it for long exposures, as i not only have to worry about tracking issues and cars passing by, but also that many of the frames gets completely ruined.

Here's an example, one is a 5 min exposure, the other is a 10 min exposure. In this case it's the 10 min exposure that's ruined, but it's not directly related to the exposure time though. I can have same issues with 1-2 min exposures too. Is this the same issue as you have?

Sorry for going a bit off topic though.

 

 

Single__2016-05-04_03-29-06.jpg

Single__2016-05-04_03-06-39.jpg

Edited by Jannis

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
33 minutes ago, Jannis said:

Ooooh! I wonder if this will be the case for the QHY5L too then maybe. Same chip, so it's possible? It's really the only reason why i haven't used it for long exposures, as i not only have to worry about tracking issues and cars passing by, but also that many of the frames gets completely ruined.

Here's an example, one is a 5 min exposure, the other is a 10 min exposure. In this case it's the 10 min exposure that's ruined, but it's not directly related to the exposure time though. I can have same issues with 1-2 min exposures too. Is this the same issue as you have?

Sorry for going a bit off topic though.

 

 

Single__2016-05-04_03-29-06.jpg

Single__2016-05-04_03-06-39.jpg

That's much more pronounced then what mine does :( On mine I get ocassionally a faint glow on the peryphery of the frame, but nothing that extreme.

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.