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_through_the-_eyepiece_winners.thumb.jpg.236833c5815bb321211a43f4d5214ba8.jpg

Scooot

46P/Wirtanen passing Capella

Recommended Posts

The same image taken on Christmas Eve I posted in the wide field section.

9E992A10-DFD5-40D1-889D-1365177571FE.thumb.png.9d47b7a0af809675da2f2e27cf55adf9.png

There’s about 50 minutes worth of 30 second subs at ISO400 at 135mm on the Star Adventurer, taken at F4 with my Canon 450D and processed in PixInsight.

 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You've captured much data then I did (from similar frame count), I like the proximity to Capella. Was is not too foggy for you?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, happy-kat said:

You've captured much data then I did (from similar frame count), I like the proximity to Capella. Was is not too foggy for you?

Hmm I don't remember it being foggy, maybe a bit hazy later on, I seem to remember I threw away quite a few near the end

Here's a couple of unprocessed subs. The first one was at 20:51 & the last at 22:11. 

I created two stacks, one aligned on the comet with most of the stars rejected, and one aligned on the stars. As Capella is so bright I couldn't get rid of the star trail in the comet only image. So I cropped out the Capella side of the Comet only stack, and cropped out the Comet side of the Star stack. I then used Pixinsight’s Gradientmergemosaic tool to recombine the good Comet half with the good star half. I did this in the linear stage before any other processing.

Now you know you can see that the far left side of the image doesn't show so many faint stars. This is because the pixel rejection of the comet only stack was higher and didn't retain so many stars. I think this is why anyway. However it does mean I get a nice clean image of Capella and its surroundings with plenty of depth so a bit of a compromise.  

179415969_FirstoneIMG_2225.thumb.JPG.87fdb790c602e26807feef566e8b80d9.JPG

 

last one IMG_2351.JPG

 

Edited by Scooot

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It is sure proving a tricky processing challenge. That's an idea I had not considered to blend two images in that way, so far I have done two images but layered over rather then joined sideways.

(PS only one image per challenge entry otherwise they may review the entry on the wrong one)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, happy-kat said:

It is sure proving a tricky processing challenge. That's an idea I had not considered to blend two images in that way, so far I have done two images but layered over rather then joined sideways.

(PS only one image per challenge entry otherwise they may review the entry on the wrong one)

I think it works quite well because it’s the same image so merging gives it a perfect join, other than the different stacking already mentioned. I don’t know whether processing both halves separately before merging might get a better over all result, I’ll have to try it. I’m thinking of trying something similar with the Luna eclipse and stars, if it’s clear that is. Although I haven’t fully thought it through so not sure whether it will work.

Edited by Scooot

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×

Important Information

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