Jump to content

sgl_imaging_challenge_2021_annual.thumb.jpg.3fc34f695a81b16210333189a3162ac7.jpg

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 66
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Newtons rings is a different from the more traditional microlensing effect you might get with and ASI1600.  In fact that you don't see it on the bright stars makes me more certain that Newton's rings

The effect is due to Newton's rings https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Newton's_rings#:~:text=Newton's rings is a phenomenon in which an,the effect in his 1704 treatise Opticks It's known on ASI1

Sure mate, it's https://www.cloudynights.com/topic/715162-chroma-3nm-orientation/

Posted Images

The stars do look a little oddly shaped to me, maybe guiding and or collimation.

You can definitely see the concentric rings though. It would be very interesting to see the same camera/filters on another scope. 

Ken 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 23/11/2020 at 21:35, souls33k3r said:

I've marked the stars for you. You'll have to zoom in to see that. 

Are these the same two images or is the second one an uncompressed version of the first?  The plate solving of each one is completely different and there is obvious fixed pattern noise in the second compared to the first (which is much smoother and more random).  In the latter the ringing artefacts are much more apparent though.

Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Whirlwind said:

Are these the same two images or is the second one an uncompressed version of the first?  The plate solving of each one is completely different and there is obvious fixed pattern noise in the second compared to the first (which is much smoother and more random).  In the latter the ringing artefacts are much more apparent though.

For the love of God I can't remember. I think they're the same but the only difference is that the first image was right out from PI and the second one (marked with red) was something I did on my phone. If that made difference to the file then I don't know

Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, souls33k3r said:

For the love of God I can't remember. I think they're the same but the only difference is that the first image was right out from PI and the second one (marked with red) was something I did on my phone. If that made difference to the file then I don't know

I've attached a comparison of the same stars between the image that shows that different in resolution.  The ringed one was giving a focal length of around 3500mm which seems high.  Also found out where the fixed noise was coming from. Apparently it was being added by the platesolve so that query is resolved.

comparison.jpg

Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, Whirlwind said:

I've attached a comparison of the same stars between the image that shows that different in resolution.  The ringed one was giving a focal length of around 3500mm which seems high.  Also found out where the fixed noise was coming from. Apparently it was being added by the platesolve so that query is resolved.

comparison.jpg

If you want and helps, I can send you a higher res image?

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 4 weeks later...

Not sure if this was resolved for you but I've been reading this thread on CN and it might be of interest to you.

The whole thread is worth reading for background info but in particular posts #276 and #278 detail the problem you're having and the potential cause (in short, this is not caused by the filters and is instead due to centrally obstructed optics producing an extended airy disk which is being detected by the camera).

Edited by Spongey
Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, Spongey said:

Not sure if this was resolved for you but I've been reading this thread on CN and it might be of interest to you.

The whole thread is worth reading for background info but in particular posts #276 and #278 detail the problem you're having and the potential cause (in short, this is not caused by the filters and is instead due to centrally obstructed optics producing an extended airy disk which is being detected by the camera).

Thank you for the link mate. Unfortunately I haven't had the chance to test anything since I last posted because of the spell of bad weather we've been going through. I do however plan to test this with another scope on the next clear night which who knows when is coming. I'd be sure to update this thread with the findings. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi @souls33k3r

Last night I got a few OIII subs of the horse head/alnitak. For the first time since using chroma filters I can see a very very slight effect similar to the one you’ve posted. 
 

To be fair it doesn’t impact the image and it’s also an exceptionally bright star so I’m in no way complaining but thought I’d share. 
 

What’s very interesting is that I took 10 subs before meridian flip and had a look at the stack which had the effect. I then performed a flip and continued imaging. But after the meridian flip the effect had gone completely even in a similar stack of images. 
 

Could the conditions be the cause? Maybe position of the star when the light hits the filter ?? But to be fair the star was almost “on axis” on both occasions. Odd 

Maybe someone technical like @vlaiv would know better ??

ken 

 

60584BF8-4CE9-4F6F-9D80-8EC0AC6B5F4C.jpeg

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, vlaiv said:

I'm not seeing the effect? Can you point it out for me?

Only thing I see is better seeing in left stack (tighter stars).

It’s not really what I would call a halo effect but it’s like a strange diffraction at either side of the bright star. @souls33k3r does appear to have it on dimmer stars but as yet I’ve only noticed a very slight effect like this on alnitak. 
 

Odd that it would disappear after meridian flip 🤔

 

B21ABB6F-D703-4430-8C51-4410FDFF4B5D.jpeg

Link to post
Share on other sites

I see two possible things happening here:

1. effect needs perfectly parallel surfaces or something and flip caused slight tilt - not enough to cause other optical problems but enough to offset the effect

2. first set of subs indeed has better seeing - star light is more concentrated and because of this effect has higher SNR and can be seen - while in second stack seeing took a turn to the worse and things are smeared out more and so is effect and it's overall SNR is not enough to show it clearly - it is still there but drowned in the noise?

Wild guesses really - but maybe I'll help ...

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I must have missed this thread back in November, but I think that the OP would appreciate my 5 cents input. Last year I had exactly the same issue, but then with the combination ZWO ASI1600MM Cool Pro, SkyWatcher Esprit 150ED and ZWO 36mm unmounted filters. I wrote a thread on a Dutch forum, but that should properly translate when opened in Chrome. Especially the second image can be of interest as it shows the differences between the old style and new style ZWO NB filters, the old ones showing halos very similar to those by the OP:

http://www.starry-night.nl/forums/topic/halos-en-zwo-filters/

So, in the end I got myself a new set of ZWO Ha and Siii filters and that solved the issue. Now, I know that the OP has a different make of filters, but using a similar methodic approach should make clear which part in the imaging train is responsible for these halos.

Nicolàs

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.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue. By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.