Second (failed) attempt at astrophotography

[Charming Potato]

I finally got the chance to test my mount. Unfortunately, I couldn't connect to my RPi because it wasn't connected to the WiFi and I didn't want to configure it to run its own hotspot again, so I decided to just go with the mount's (SA GTi) tracking. After polar alignment, I issued the goto for NGC7000, which seemed a little bit out of focus because I had the lens at 250mm. Ended up using 155mm, which was my first mistake; I believe it zoomed in WAY too much. Then halfway through clouds came so lost about 10 frames, and then lost about 30 frames because dew started forming on the lens and I didn't notice it and that was my second mistake.

Nikon Z50

Star Adventurer GTi

Nikon kit lens 50-250mm @ 5.3

132 x 30sec (including the frames blurred by dew)

39 flats, 20 dark, 92 bias frames

I'm also bad at post processing, so any help would be really appreciated as this is just my second picture (first with a tracker). This was shot from a Bortle 8 area.

 

[Elp]

As mentioned previously this is a very good attempt.

Your image will benefit from a background extraction process via astro processing software, Siril is free so no harm in trying as it's literally a two or three button process (it can get more involved if you want, it's good to learn how it works). That should even the field illumination, not sure if the flats calibrated the image quite right.

[teoria_del_big_bang]

As above this is far from a failure. The image produced really is a worthwhile image. Yes I am sure some more experienced could improve the image using the same data but believe me good processing does not easily and takes practice and time to master (if we ever master it, I suspect we all get better but only a few master it 🙂 ).

I would be well happy with that as an early image.

By all means upload your raw data and I will have a go to see what I could produce (although I certainly am one of those that have not mastered processing for sure but can usually cobble together a reasonable image), but some of our other members may also have a go that will produce far better than myself.
On the whole I think the processing of data by third parties is not a great help with your processing skills as you still need time and practice, but does have some advantages in giving you some clues where to look to improve and at least gives you an idea how good your data actually is.

Steve

[Ratlet]

I round the best way to approach astrophotography is not to look at it as one thing but rather lots of little things combined.

Processing a DSLR image is hard because the built in filter damps the nebulosity.  You could try doing star removal before trying to tease out the detail from the nebulosity, which I've found works really well with DSLR images.

From a cursory glance at it though, I'd be delighted with the data you've captured.  There is very little chromatic aberration around the stars and they look nice and sharp.

This is a very successful image for a second attempt and you should be proud of it!

[Charming Potato]

Thank you everyone! I had another go at the same target on a different night, but this time I went with 37x120 seconds exposures at 100mm F5 rather than 150mm. I used Siril to process the image this time and I am much happier with the result. I used Starnet to remove the background and for stars reduction, and it was much better! I did learn that this is not a very good target for unmodified camera in a light polluted area, so I'll try a different target next time, but overall I'm very happy with Siril.

Here is the stacked image of this new attempt: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1Veox_W6nJ9VU_MEnmZozeIl2Avygm5YG/view?usp=sharing

If someone can process it their way, I would like to see how my attempt compares to experts here so I can understand what I am missing.

Edited July 1, 2023 by Charming Potato