NGC7635

[scotty38]

Thought I'd try this tonight and it's still going as we speak but decided to stack what I have so far. I think I'm ok with this given how low it is, I've pretty much had to crop the lawn from the bottom edge 🙂

[Budgie1]

I like this area because you get 3-4 targets in the same frame.

I managed 5.5 hours back in December using the EvoStar ED80 DS Pro, ASI294MC Pro and the Askar Duo-Band filter. It'll be nice to see your finished image. 👍

[teoria_del_big_bang]

Yes I also like this target (or targets).
Two great images there @scotty38 and @Budgie1 🙂 

Steve

[scotty38]

@Budgie What exposure settings did you use for yours as my backgrounds are looking washed out unless you're doing that in processing?  I recently started using a gain of 200 rather than 121 and I'm not sure I needed to....

[Budgie1]

1 hour ago, scotty38 said:

@Budgie What exposure settings did you use for yours as my backgrounds are looking washed out unless you're doing that in processing?  I recently started using a gain of 200 rather than 121 and I'm not sure I needed to....

I did this before the discussion about the gain & offset settings with ASI294MC and I still haven't had chance to try the gain 200 setting yet. 

The camera was set to -10°C, gain 120, offset 8 and I used 240s exposures. I don't think I used flats with this one, due to them creating gradients, so only Darks for calibration.

I'm not seeing anything in your image that can't be sorted in post-processing with a reduction of green using SCNR at, say, 50% and some playing with curves.

[scotty38]

1 hour ago, Budgie1 said:

I did this before the discussion about the gain & offset settings with ASI294MC and I still haven't had chance to try the gain 200 setting yet. 

The camera was set to -10°C, gain 120, offset 8 and I used 240s exposures. I don't think I used flats with this one, due to them creating gradients, so only Darks for calibration.

I'm not seeing anything in your image that can't be sorted in post-processing with a reduction of green using SCNR at, say, 50% and some playing with curves.

Thanks will have a play later and think I might go back to gain 121 as I’ve not seen any benefit of 200 to my untrained eyes……

[Budgie1]

54 minutes ago, scotty38 said:

Thanks will have a play later and think I might go back to gain 121 as I’ve not seen any benefit of 200 to my untrained eyes……

I think the benefits of using the 200 gain, as I understand it, was to bring it above a threshold were the flats would work correctly when the likes of the L-eXtreme or Duo-Band (in my case) filters were used. 

I've now created two Darks libraries, one with gain 120 for use with the only the UV/IR cut filter and a second with gain 200 for use with the Duo-Band filter.

Did the flats work okay with this image, although I know you sorted the issue you were having with the flats with the offset setting?

[scotty38]

38 minutes ago, Budgie1 said:

I think the benefits of using the 200 gain, as I understand it, was to bring it above a threshold were the flats would work correctly when the likes of the L-eXtreme or Duo-Band (in my case) filters were used. 

I've now created two Darks libraries, one with gain 120 for use with the only the UV/IR cut filter and a second with gain 200 for use with the Duo-Band filter.

Did the flats work okay with this image, although I know you sorted the issue you were having with the flats with the offset setting?

Yes flats seem ok with these at 200 but they also seem ok at 121 now my offset is sorted. I thought I'd try 200 anyway but what I'm going to do on my next clear night is take this same target but alternate frames between 200 and 121 to see if there is any difference in my subs....

[scotty38]

Update with a few extra lights

[geeklee]

On 26/02/2022 at 00:28, scotty38 said:

I've pretty much had to crop the lawn from the bottom edge 🙂

🤣

Very nice @scotty38  You've still got the highlights under control (inside the bubble and NGC7538)