Yet another Cygnus! Crescent and Sadr with Star 71

[StargeezerTim]

This is my second light with the Star 71. Like the first light, the weather intervened and I only managed to get 15 X 5 min, iso 800, subs. Stacked in DSS and processed in PS.

That Sadr is a difficult beast to tame 

 

[MARS1960]

Nice one Tim, great result for only 75mins.

[StargeezerTim]

8 minutes ago, MARS1960 said:

Nice one Tim, great result for only 75mins.

Cheers Mark.... 

[Allinthehead]

Very nice Tim.

[Ruud]

Great image, also literally at over 70 MB. As good as it is big. It's amazing that it came from such a little telescope. 

Thanks!

 

[Rodd]

Nice image.  I like the framing-the eye roves around looking for the crescent, making one notice the entire image.  Those Star 71s are impressive.

Rodd

[StargeezerTim]

6 hours ago, Rodd said:

Nice image.  I like the framing-the eye roves around looking for the crescent, making one notice the entire image.  Those Star 71s are impressive.

Rodd

Thanks Rodd,

It is an impressive scope and its given me motivation to develop the processing skills further. Here is another version where I have done some more star work, tried to remove the L/R gradient by creating and subtracting a gradient in PS  and more stretching and selective smoothing. I'm sure it looks really overdone now but I had fun with it, albeit I would have preferred some clear skies and more data...

 

[Rodd]

2 hours ago, StargeezerTim said:

Thanks Rodd,

It is an impressive scope and its given me motivation to develop the processing skills further. Here is another version where I have done some more star work, tried to remove the L/R gradient by creating and subtracting a gradient in PS  and more stretching and selective smoothing. I'm sure it looks really overdone now but I had fun with it, albeit I would have preferred some clear skies and more data...

 

I think I prefer #1--but if you had fun, that is what counts.  I think a bit less of what you did  might be good though--just to clean it up without the obvious blurring of NC.  have you tried replacing the stars with the stars in the Ha stack?  I find that works great--it tightens them up and removes the reddish small ones.  But if you like the color in the stars then it won't suit you.  In my NB  images star color annoys me--especially the teeny ones.  I prefer all of then to be white (though RGB stars are great).

Rodd

[StargeezerTim]

1 hour ago, Rodd said:

I think I prefer #1--but if you had fun, that is what counts.  I think a bit less of what you did  might be good though--just to clean it up without the obvious blurring of NC.  have you tried replacing the stars with the stars in the Ha stack?  I find that works great--it tightens them up and removes the reddish small ones.  But if you like the color in the stars then it won't suit you.  In my NB  images star color annoys me--especially the teeny ones.  I prefer all of then to be white (though RGB stars are great).

Rodd

I just use DSLR's Rodd. RGB only for this laptop free technophobe! I do find star processing difficult, especially in images like this one. If I process the stars and background separately, then I have trouble with halo's in the lighter areas but if I do them together, they end up taking over.... Practice will improve things, no good having a great scope and average processing skills. Cheers. Tim. 

[Rodd]

3 hours ago, StargeezerTim said:

I just use DSLR's Rodd. RGB only for this laptop free technophobe! I do find star processing difficult, especially in images like this one. If I process the stars and background separately, then I have trouble with halo's in the lighter areas but if I do them together, they end up taking over.... Practice will improve things, no good having a great scope and average processing skills. Cheers. Tim. 

I understand completely.  I guess I am a semi techniphobe, which is the reason I can't bring myself to learn autofocus and platesolving.  I have been tempted to use DSLRs for their big chips and relative inexpensiveness.   My skies however are best suited with NB filters most of the time.  I wonder if there is a way to remove the bayer filter from the DSLR, rendering it a mono camera.  

Rodd   

[swag72]

3 hours ago, Rodd said:

......  I wonder if there is a way to remove the bayer filter from the DSLR, rendering it a mono camera.  

Sure is..... here's one company that does it http://www.jtwastronomy.com/products/monochrome.html and there's others I've seen too 

[Rodd]

2 hours ago, swag72 said:

Sure is..... here's one company that does it http://www.jtwastronomy.com/products/monochrome.html and there's others I've seen too 

Oh, so that is what a modded camera is.  Thanks.

Rodd

[swag72]

3 minutes ago, Rodd said:

Oh, so that is what a modded camera is.  Thanks.

Rodd

A modded camera doesn't necessarily mean that its mono..... That is a further modification

 

[StargeezerTim]

4 hours ago, swag72 said:

Sure is..... here's one company that does it http://www.jtwastronomy.com/products/monochrome.html and there's others I've seen too 

Looks interesting to me, especially as i want to avoid using a laptop. I will check, but my hunch is a modded, mono, cooled DSLR won't be cheap!

[Rodd]

1 hour ago, swag72 said:

A modded camera doesn't necessarily mean that its mono..... That is a further modification

 

Good to know--I would be unpleasantly surprised if I was expecting it but did not know to specify it.

Rodd

4 minutes ago, StargeezerTim said:

Looks interesting to me, especially as i want to avoid using a laptop. I will check, but my hunch is a modded, mono, cooled DSLR won't be cheap!

Still much cheaper than most CCDs with the same size sensor.  But I am afraid nothing of quality in this hobby is cheap--especially, and ironically, clear, dark skies!  Though Olly's facility is tantalizingly affordable (I wish I could say as much for the airlines!)

Rodd