M31 - my first attempt

[Petergoodhew]

Captured on my remote TS Star71 in Spain.

5h50m total integration (41x300s L, 10x300s R, G and B).

[Sunshine]

I'm no authority on AP but i would say that's a great first attempt for sure!

[dannybgoode]

If my first attempt is even remotely this good I’ll be delighted. Great job   what camera did you use?

[Petergoodhew]

Just now, dannybgoode said:

what camera did you use

It was a Teleskop Service Star71 (effectively a clone of a William Optics Star71). F4.9

[DougM43]

Oh yes, That is a superb Image, brilliant..

[dannybgoode]

42 minutes ago, Petergoodhew said:

It was a Teleskop Service Star71 (effectively a clone of a William Optics Star71). F4.9

Thanks -very nice. Which CCD or CMOS did you use?

[vlaiv]

Hope you don't mind me being maybe a bit harsh with this comment, but something is odd with the image - it feels softer than it should be.

I took a closer look and indeed, there are some artifacts, can't really say if its due to focus issues or processing, but here it is:

 

[Petergoodhew]

2 minutes ago, dannybgoode said:

Which CCD or CMOS did you use?

QSI683 CCD camera

[Petergoodhew]

48 minutes ago, vlaiv said:

Hope you don't mind me being maybe a bit harsh with this comment, but something is odd with the image - it feels softer than it should be.

I took a closer look and indeed, there are some artifacts, can't really say if its due to focus issues or processing, but here it is:

 

Thanks VLAV.  Well spotted!  I check it out.  Peter

[Nick Smith]

Great job, just need to nail the focus!

[ollypenrice]

Yes, I'm not convinced by the focus either but here in SE France we have recently had seeing so bad that I have scarcely been able to believe it. Also the small aperture will tend to throw up larger stars. (The Tak was giving an FWHM of 2.3 when it often comes down to 0.88.)

Jetstreams in the wrong place, I guess.

Olly

[Davey-T]

2 minutes ago, ollypenrice said:

Edited just now by ollypenrice

I was just looking for one of those Yak scopes 

Dave

[Petergoodhew]

On 20/01/2019 at 17:21, ollypenrice said:

Yes, I'm not convinced by the focus either but here in SE France we have recently had seeing so bad that I have scarcely been able to believe it. Also the small aperture will tend to throw up larger stars. (The Tak was giving an FWHM of 2.3 when it often comes down to 0.88.)

Jetstreams in the wrong place, I guess.

Olly

You were right not to be convinced Olly. I was also getting FWHM of 2.3 on the Star71 - but that doesn't explain the softness, nor does poor focus. Careless clumsy processing is the explanation!  Have reprocessed the luminance from scratch. I think this is an improvement.

 

[vlaiv]

Yes, this is better.

Dust lanes definition improvement is noticeable. Still quite a lot softness, but as Olly pointed out - is probably due to seeing (and having tough time trying to focus in poor seeing), and not much can be done about that.

[ollypenrice]

Indeed better. Shoot some fresh lum when the seeing's settled, maybe. It won't much matter for the colour.

Olly

[Stub Mandrel]

A bit of judicious deconvolution might help make it 'crisper'.

You may also want to play with gamma a bit, perhaps dropping it to 0.95 or 0.9