The EQ3 DSO Challenge

[mikey2000]

Peter, I can't help feeling you have more than meets the eye hiding in your data.  I wonder if PS Express is maybe not the ideal tool for astrophotos...  If you'd like to upload an untouched/unstretched/unsaturated .FTS file from your DSS output, I'd be happy to run it through Startools to see if anything else is hiding in there.

 

For andromeda, I'm waiting for it to rise above my neighbours roof.  I didn't have much luck last season with my 150PDS.  I think part of that is down to Andromeda being so huge (about 3 moon widths) that it barely fits in the view of my scope. I might try with my 70-400 camera lens....

[Peco4321]

Thanks @mikey2000, do you mean the autosave.tiff, as it's 121mgb!

I have assed some flats to Andromeda and think this is an improvement.

[mikey2000]

Peter - yep, the autosave file.  But can you set the options to create .fits files (it gives better data for Startools.exe).  You can set the option in the Stacking Parameters of DSS - go to the Intermediate Files options and change TIF to FITS.

So if you could restack then upload the autosave.fits file to drop box (or similar)  I can have a go for you.   My broadband isn't metered and is quite fast so 120+MB isn't a problem at my end.

 

One other thing - are you feeding raw files into DSS?  If so you could change the RAW/FITS DPP Settings (bottom left of the main screen) to Create Super Pixels - it cuts the file size to 25%.

[Peco4321]

try this one @mikey2000, I had already started the DSS run before changing any setting but 50mgb not too bad.  If no good, I'll stack again tomorrow, need sleep as was out till 0300 this morning, thanks.

8th Julywith flats no processing.TIF

[mikey2000]

Thanks, I'll take a quick look.   If you could also re-stack for the FITS file, I'm sure Startools prefers those.

 

I didn't get to bed until 5:30am so I know how it feels (but my late night was work related...)

[mikey2000]

Hmm.   Startools won't read that tif file.  Ho hum.

 

I am also about to hit the hay.   Sleep well!

[alacant]

7 hours ago, Peco4321 said:

try this one @mikey2000, I had already started the DSS run before changing any setting but 50mgb not too bad.  If no good, I'll stack again tomorrow, need sleep as was out till 0300 this morning, thanks.

8th Julywith flats no processing.TIF

Here's a quick look at your stack with StarTools in big-hammer mode There is colour... I think the main problem is gonna be the gradient bottom left to top right and what could be a light leak top centre. Certainly doable though  HTH.

 

Edited July 10, 2017 by alacant

[Art Gecko]

17 hours ago, Peco4321 said:

I've been setting it at 17%, read it somewhere. Will have a play around and try more data when the moon is out the way.  Typical though, Saturday night, clear skies but a bloody great big bright moon. 

First of all, well done Peter, managing to get those shots on a full moon with an unmodded camera... Not Easy!! But you can pull more out of that veil Nebula for sure!

Load it up in Photoshop, then open up the Levels window, in there are 3 eyedroppers (black white and greyscale) double click on the Black point eyedropper and set the RGB to 35:35:35 if it isn't already, then just click on the background with the eyedropper (somewhere close to the nebula, but away from the stars)... The nebula will instantly pop out with colour and the background will lose all that horrible brightness... you will have some vignetting to deal with, but try it and show us the results.

HTH Art.

[Peco4321]

Thanks for all tips everyone, processing is as complex as getting the shot in the 1st place ? I'll keep going at it as it's looking like a cloudy week  

I tried again just to draw some colour out, loaded the auto saved tiff back into DSS and it seemed to have more colour straight away. Hears a comparison of mine with a google image I found, so I'm quite chuffed. 

[Art Gecko]

Good effort mate, it's not an easy one to process.. Think I stretched mine 3 or 4 times and removed the gradient each time to get anything out of it... Keep going, there's more in there as Alacant has shown

[Peco4321]

5 hours ago, alacant said:

could be a light leak

What could be causing that, or maybe just the full moon?

[Peco4321]

3 minutes ago, Art Gecko said:

Good effort mate, it's not an easy one to process.. Think I stretched mine 3 or 4 times and removed the gradient each time to get anything out of it... Keep going, there's more in there as Alacant has shown

Cheers. It's so rewarding imaging things I didn't even know existed 18 months ago. 

[alacant]

53 minutes ago, Peco4321 said:

What could be causing that, or maybe just the full moon?

Hi. How does -the stretched- master flat frame look? That may help us diagnose moon or not...

[Peco4321]

5 minutes ago, alacant said:

Hi. How does -the stretched- master flat frame look? That may help us diagnose moon or not...

Will check tonight. 

[Nigel G]

Good effort Peter, the Veil is a tough one with short exposures and a moon around  

It is possible to get light leaking through the camera from the eye piece, canon supply a cap for this which is on the camera strap.

If you haven't used it yet simply unclip the eye socket and fit the cap, torch light or any light behind could leak through.

Nige.

This was over a hundred 45s exposures with no moon and unmodified canon a year ago.

Still waiting for a chance at this with my new setup.

 

[Peco4321]

Thanks @Nigel G, that give me plenty of motivation. I really want some nice images of mine to print out this year and this target is perfect. I have m42 from last year but hope to improve when it comes back (like an old friend!). 

[Peco4321]

8 hours ago, alacant said:

Hi. How does -the stretched- master flat frame look? That may help us diagnose moon or not...

Here it is.

MasterFlat_ISO800.tif

[Peco4321]

22 hours ago, mikey2000 said:

re-stack for the FITS file

Here you go, not sure it's any better though.

Autosave001.tif

[bobro]

2 hours ago, Peco4321 said:

Here it is.

MasterFlat_ISO800.tif

Great to see you getting flats to work now - really makes a big difference to your images!

I wonder if your scope is a litttle out of collimation? A stretched version of the flat should be fairly symmetrical in brightness, whereas yours is offset. This can be seen in coma in the stars in the darker regions of the first image without flats. For comparison here are stretched flats for our scopes. No big deal though...

 

[alacant]

10 hours ago, bobro said:

out of collimation?

Hi. I think so and/or tilt although it doesn't show the FWOABW light leak I mentioned. Maybe just my inadequate processing. Here's the master flat showing the tilt... HTH.

 

[Peco4321]

1 hour ago, alacant said:

Hi. I think so and/or tilt although it doesn't show the FWOABW light leak I mentioned. Maybe just my inadequate processing. Here's the master flat showing the tilt... HTH.

 

That explains a lot of my images having a lighter patch in that area. Is it a tilt of my camera on the t ring/ focus or something else. 

Thanks for taking the time to check this out. 

[Nigel G]

@Peco4321 Is the bright spot in the same position every time?

Or does it change when the camera is at a different orientation on the scope?

If you take a flat then spin the camera 180 degrees and take another flat this will tell you whether its the scope or camera. Make sure the cameras auto orientation is disabled for this so the top of the camera is always the top of the image regardless of the cameras orientation.

If the bright spot is in the same position its the camera but if its opposite its the scope.

[bobro]

Another test to find out whether the focuser is true is to rack the focuser totally inwards and take a flat. Then rack the focuser outwards and take another flat. If, when the 2 flats are stretched, the bright spot is in the same place then the focuser is true.

31 minutes ago, Nigel G said:

If the bright spot is in the same position its the camera but if its opposite its the scope.

Nige - what camera problem could cause this? A mis-aligned sensor?

[Nigel G]

3 hours ago, bobro said:

Nige - what camera problem could cause this? A mis-aligned sensor?

Bob, The only things I can think of is a misaligned sensor which is most unlikely or a sloppy or loose fitting T-ring.

The weight of a camera on a focuser can cause a slight problem, ( my star discovery 150p does this) cheap focuser.

I would look at the collimation first then the focuser, see if the focuser moves when it takes the weight of the camera, not in or out but relative to its 90 degree angle to the OTA.

The method of collecting flats could play a part too.

I simply point the scope at a white computer screen, about 4 to 6 inches from the screen, snap off 30 or so on AV mode moving the scope slightly every shot, that's it. This seems to work very well for me.

Nige.

[Peco4321]

Thanks @Nigel G, next time this rain stops I'll try these things. I think I have cracked getting the flats now, white pillow case folded in half over the scope the day after taking subs having left everything attached. I think it maybe a loose fitting, like you say, 90' to the scope. I could reduce this by rotating in the rings depending on the angle of the target or maybe taping the t ring so it is tighter in the focuser. Thanks again everyone, the curve of learning carries on and on.....