Never thought I would do this : 10min subs on a RASA

[Catanonia]

Ever since I started this hobby I have wanted to get the flux captured in between the Bodes galaxies.

I image from my backyard in Bortle 5 - 6 skies and about 5 years ago with a Skywatcher Mus F5.3 I nearly captured it with about 15 hours of data.

Now tonight is perfect conditions and I have a Rasa8 F2 and ZWO 2600MC pro and currently capturing 10 min subs !!!!!!

I hope I can get the flux, if this does not work in my skies nothing will.

Here is the 1st 10min sub (preview from asi air) with a lEnhance 2inch filter

WISH ME LUCK

 

 

Edited November 28, 2021 by Catanonia

[Stickey]

Cool 👍

[Sunshine]

Interesting, I'm not an imager so pardon my ignorance but do 10min subs on a speed demon f2.8 scope push the limits when it comes to controlling noise? asking for a friend 😁

[Whirlwind]

I'm not sure why you need to do this?  Because of the sensitivity of the camera, low read noise, fast optics you aren't going to gain much compared to much short exposures and stacking them - it might even be worse because your background is much more impacted by light pollution?

[The Lazy Astronomer]

3 hours ago, Whirlwind said:

I'm not sure why you need to do this?  Because of the sensitivity of the camera, low read noise, fast optics you aren't going to gain much compared to much short exposures and stacking them - it might even be worse because your background is much more impacted by light pollution?

Agree. Expose until background sky level swamps camera read noise. Once that point is reached, exposing for longer doesn't really gain anything, plus it may saturate a (relatively) large number of pixels, losing colour information in stars and bright areas.

[Catanonia]

1 hour ago, The Lazy Astronomer said:

Agree. Expose until background sky level swamps camera read noise. Once that point is reached, exposing for longer doesn't really gain anything, plus it may saturate a (relatively) large number of pixels, losing colour information in stars and bright areas.

Experiment is the main reason. Also using a lEnhance filter for LP.

Never learn unless you try

 

[Catanonia]

Some VERY BASIC processing concentrating on the background and not the actual galaxies and I have captured the IFN 

Comparing to stock photos of the IFN, no mistaking it and never thought this would be possible in Bortle 5 - 6 skies.

Now many hours of processing to produce a merged HDR  image. This will take time, something in UK skies we have plenty of.

Edited November 28, 2021 by Catanonia

[ONIKKINEN]

18 hours ago, Catanonia said:

Here is the 1st 10min sub (preview from asi air) with a lEnhance 2inch filter

I would take the filter out, as it works against you pretty severely in this case.

The l-enhance cuts out almost all of the visible spectrum, except for the common emission lines of H-alpha beta Oxygen something something etc. The IFN is reflected starlight from the integrated flux (hence the name) of the stars of our entire galaxy, and since starlight is mostly white and falls to the area that your filter cuts off you really are sawing almost all of the nebulosity off. Just shoot without the filter and take normal RASA length subs and i think you would already have the IFN visible quite well.

[The Lazy Astronomer]

10 hours ago, Catanonia said:

Experiment is the main reason. Also using a lEnhance filter for LP.

Never learn unless you try

 

I'm all for experimentation when it comes to things like this - that is the scientific method after all.

I look forward to seeing the finished product 👍

[Whirlwind]

6 hours ago, The Lazy Astronomer said:

I'm all for experimentation when it comes to things like this - that is the scientific method after all.

I look forward to seeing the finished product 👍

To an extent, but that doesn't mean you will get a different result.  A rather vacuous example is that we can all jump of a 30 floor building to 'test' gravity but we all know what the end result will be etc.  I tend to recommend these two youtube videos as they explain why just running very long subs doesn't always add a benefit to imaging.

Deep Sky Astrophotography With CMOS Cameras by Dr Robin Glover - YouTube

Choosing the right gain for Deep Sky imaging with CMOS cameras - YouTube

 

[The Lazy Astronomer]

2 hours ago, Whirlwind said:

To an extent, but that doesn't mean you will get a different result.  A rather vacuous example is that we can all jump of a 30 floor building to 'test' gravity but we all know what the end result will be etc.  I tend to recommend these two youtube videos as they explain why just running very long subs doesn't always add a benefit to imaging.

Deep Sky Astrophotography With CMOS Cameras by Dr Robin Glover - YouTube

Choosing the right gain for Deep Sky imaging with CMOS cameras - YouTube

 

Don't get me wrong, I agree with you (and in fact base my own settings on the advice in the videos you linked), but that doesn't mean I'm not interested in seeing the results of someone else's work.