Register now to gain access to all of our features. Once registered and logged in, you will be able to contribute to this site by submitting your own content or replying to existing content. You'll be able to customise your profile, receive reputation points as a reward for submitting content, while also communicating with other members via your own private inbox, plus much more! This message will be removed once you have signed in.
9 posts in this topic
Recently Browsing 0 members
No registered users viewing this page.
I was determined to have a crack at Saturn on father's day after a nice day with the kids.
I knew it was low at about 15° but was pretty sure I would spot it over neighbours roofs ...
When I set up at 11:30 I realised that it DIDN'T
Not to be deterred I set up in the extension (about 1.5 m higher than garden)
I knew this would be far from ideal but had a bash anyway, I'm actually quite surprised with the result shooting through an open double doorway.
C8 edge, TV 2x Barlow, asi224
CMI=338.6° CMIII=274.1° (during mid of capture)
Extended AVI mode=true
Sensor temperature=32.1 °C
Somehow manged to coax reasonble detail with the help of an ADC despite the altitude of 14 degrees in West Sussex. I have looked at the firecapture log and a bit confused as to how it works out that the image was taken at f40. In the image train was a c9.25 scope, a skywatcher dual speed focuser, a x2 Barlow, astrosystems holland ADC then the zwo asi224MC camera.
I thought I'd post my image from last month, since we don't see these posted often.
So, I shot through a Venus U filter, an Orion Imaging and a 640nm IR-pass, assigning them to B,G,R respectively (and boosting saturation to great levels as the moon is very reflective on all those frequencies). Each of those images was actually a mosaic of 3 subframes made by processing videos shot with an ASI290MM. I used my least sharp OTA, the 130PDS, since I wanted to avoid lenses/correctors for the UV filter.
Before I got the mono camera, I had tried one with my color Altair IMX224, but as it is much less sensitive to UV, the UV image was closer to the visible (and noisier), so there was some "extra" curve manipulation (the above is pretty much extreme contrast boost instead) which I would call "cheating", but you can also call "artistic":
Same technique otherwise, although the smaller sensor required 4 frames to capture the whole moon. I documented my processing in a blog post if you are curious.