Jump to content

SkySurveyBanner.jpg.21855908fce40597655603b6c9af720d.jpg

My first Jupiter image.

Nigella Bryant

By Nigella Bryant
in Imaging - Planetary

 Share

Recommended Posts

ONIKKINEN

ONIKKINEN

Posted
Posted

Looks great for a first shot, i shall not post mine to spare me from the embarrassment 😁.
Try the Low Light AI mode, that is often times the most effective with astrophotography. I find that mode is the least temperamental of the bunch when used with low values (less than 5 often more than enough).

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Nigella Bryant

Nigella Bryant

Posted
  • Author
Posted
12 minutes ago, ONIKKINEN said:

Looks great for a first shot, i shall not post mine to spare me from the embarrassment 😁.
Try the Low Light AI mode, that is often times the most effective with astrophotography. I find that mode is the least temperamental of the bunch when used with low values (less than 5 often more than enough).

Is the low light function in autostakker or when capturing. TBH I've not done any serious planetary imaging and when I've done some before it was 15yrs ago with primitive webcams, lol. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
ONIKKINEN

ONIKKINEN

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, Nigella Bryant said:

Is the low light function in autostakker or when capturing. TBH I've not done any serious planetary imaging and when I've done some before it was 15yrs ago with primitive webcams, lol. 

In the TopazAI window you have open. If you end up using TopazAI for astrophotography, then i recommend the low light mode with very small adjustments.


Registax6 wavelet sharpening is what folks usually use to sharpen their planetary images, its worth looking into. Fair warning though, the sliders hardly make any sense at first and you will probably feel a bit lost when trying that out.
You could also tick the sharpened box when stacking in AS!3 which will save both a raw image and a sharpened image straight out the stacker which will make life a bit easier. The sharpened image is often easier to work with and will require less adjustments than the raw one, but from the raw one you could extract more if you were experienced enough (often times i am not, so might be a wrong guess).

Captureasdasd.JPG.83dfa4ac067be539074740e1c6fa6d4d.JPG

  • Thanks 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
knobby

knobby

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, Nigella Bryant said:

Well, I've tweaked it in Photoshop and not sure if I've over or under processed it. Pleased with the first light image though. 

Celestron 11inch SCT, Zwo Asi 224mc + Baader Neodymium filter + ADC, 9,000 frames with 25% stack using autostakker3, 

PSX_20220917_190031.png

In registax try the RGB alignment tool, it should make things a bit sharper , the colours  look slightly misaligned.

If it won't open try running registax as admin.

Great shot though.

 

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Elp

Elp

Posted
Posted

I don't use registax much, but last time with the wavelet sliders I found starting from the first one you do the most aggressive setting within reason, then slowly dial each following one slightly less than the preceding one. It worked for me. Also depending on the quality graph produced from AS3, stack accordingly. Normally I only do around 10%, it depends on seeing when the images were taken. It's a great first attempt.

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Tommohawk

Tommohawk

Posted
Posted
4 hours ago, Nigella Bryant said:

Just been playing with registax as I've not used it much in the past. So here's a reprocessed image from the early morning of the 17th 

 

Yes that looks really nice! Not sure what exposure you're using but somewhere around 5ms should be good. So a two minute video should get you around 24,000 frames. With that many frames probably then only use best 5%. That might give even nicer result. 

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
neil phillips

neil phillips

Posted
Posted (edited)
40 minutes ago, Tommohawk said:

Yes that looks really nice! Not sure what exposure you're using but somewhere around 5ms should be good. So a two minute video should get you around 24,000 frames. With that many frames probably then only use best 5%. That might give even nicer result. 

Agree it's easy to see more frames is needed. Under good seeing way more than 5% is possible. I am routinely using 25% and more. With a lot more frames I can tell the result will be quite good. Though clearly alignment is causing a little problem. But sortable of course. Between 6000 and 12000 should be tried when seeing is calm. If seeing is up to it the result will be a lot better. 

There's promise here for sure Nigella

Edited by neil phillips
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
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
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • 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.