Why I love EAA!

[Norris Adams]

I am blown away by many of the images that serious astrophotographers show on this site and other comparable astronomy portals. I cannot (and do not) expect to achieve similar results. My equipment, my patience and the Yorkshire weather place stringent limits on what I can realistically hope to do!

But I can acquire an image in around five minutes - and sometimes it's out of all proportion to what I was expecting!

Here's one I did of C12 earlier (a few nights ago). It was stacked in SharpCap and incorporated both Darks and Flats (the latter for the first time). I also did a little stretching and final touch up in GIMP.

Of course it still takes 30-45 minutes to set up, but I can usually beat the clouds and get a few captures in before they come back!

EAA allows me to cut through light pollution, to see objects five or six magnitudes fainter than with the scope alone and finally, it gives me a permanent record of what I have observed.

I recommend it to the house!

Norris 

SkyWatcher P150i / ZWO ASI 183MC

 

[Vroobel]

59 minutes ago, Norris Adams said:

I am blown away by many of the images that serious astrophotographers show on this site and other comparable astronomy portals. I cannot (and do not) expect to achieve similar results. My equipment, my patience and the Yorkshire weather place stringent limits on what I can realistically hope to do!

 

I live in Merseyside which is called 'a cloud generator'. I think the only thing which differentiates us is patience.  

 

[Roy Foreman]

It's not only up north that gets the cloud. I'm in west somerset and six months into 2024 and I've only had three cloud free nights. Shooting through or between clouds is a way of life. I have plenty of patience but it's wearing a bit thin.

Well done for defying the elements and producing an acceptable result.

[Coco]

Swap your cameras for an eyepiece, I did and never looked back

[Norris Adams]

17 hours ago, Vroobel said:

 

I live in Merseyside which is called 'a cloud generator'. I think the only thing which differentiates us is patience.  

 

Hi Vroobel - I guess that'll be all the wet Atlantic weather squeezing up towards the Pennines!

Well done on the perseverance front!

Norris

[Norris Adams]

7 hours ago, Coco said:

Swap your cameras for an eyepiece, I did and never looked back

Thanks Coco - For all its frustrations (and there are plenty!) I'll stick with my trusty CMOS camera!

I understand what you're saying though. Visual astronomy is a very different experience. 

I think you 'live in the moment' more looking down an eyepiece - if that makes sense?

Norris

[Norris Adams]

8 hours ago, Roy Foreman said:

It's not only up north that gets the cloud. I'm in west somerset and six months into 2024 and I've only had three cloud free nights. Shooting through or between clouds is a way of life. I have plenty of patience but it's wearing a bit thin.

Well done for defying the elements and producing an acceptable result.

Hi Roy,

It's certainly been a difficult year.  With so few clear skies, I can understand why people crave a permanent housing for their kit (just to snatch a few images when the opportunity arises).

Norris

 

[carastro]

I have been watchig the Smart Telescope images being posted by my local group and they are quite impressive, and certainly make getting an image more accessible to many.  

However if you are already imaging with traditional kit  - Smart telescopes would not bring enough satisfaction as they do not do long enough exposures.  

[DaveS]

Nope, not for me. EEA lacks both the organic immediacy of eyeball to eyepiece and the ability to go deep, especially on faint galaxies, that true Deep Sky imaging provides.

[Elp]

To me, EAA is pretty much AP without the post processing. You're still taking subs and stacking them but in real time. I sometimes do it to check what's around, then set it to run an imaging session to process later. You do remember visual experiences more but I think that's more to do with a biological response, looking at a screen doesn't elicit the same (emotional) feeling hence why people prefer "analogue" visual experiences, you can't fight with thousands of years of biological evolution.

I do think where applicable a camera can be "better" because a camera sees over time rather than at the time, so visually you'll never match what a camera can see especially in light polluted areas. I'll take a ten second image of M13 over a incredibly faint (is it there?) smudge visually any day in my LP zone, in fact it's why I image, I can't see anything of significance DSO wise from a Bortle 7 even with six inch aperture.

But I do agree when you do get moments of good seeing, visual does astound at times.

[DaveS]

I can still remember, shortly after moving here, pointing my 180 mak-cass (All I had available at the time) at M65 / 66 and seeing what appeared to be a pair of headlights in the dark.

Helps that I have SQI 21.66 sky.

[Norris Adams]

18 hours ago, carastro said:

I have been watchig the Smart Telescope images being posted by my local group and they are quite impressive, and certainly make getting an image more accessible to many.  

However if you are already imaging with traditional kit  - Smart telescopes would not bring enough satisfaction as they do not do long enough exposures.  

Paradoxically Carastro, Smart telescopes seem a bit 'too easy' to me!

Not that I have ever used one, but I have tried subscribing to remote telescopes and processing the images they deliver. Even though the quality is much better than anything I can produce with my own kit, the finished output didn't feel like I owned it....since I hadn't put the effort in the acquire the image - I'd done it through a middle-man. 

Maybe I'm just too 'old-school'! 

Perhaps, to misquote an advert on TV - "maybe one day all telescopes will be made like this".

Norris

[Norris Adams]

16 hours ago, Elp said:

To me, EAA is pretty much AP without the post processing. You're still taking subs and stacking them but in real time. I sometimes do it to check what's around, then set it to run an imaging session to process later. You do remember visual experiences more but I think that's more to do with a biological response, looking at a screen doesn't elicit the same (emotional) feeling hence why people prefer "analogue" visual experiences, you can't fight with thousands of years of biological evolution.

I do think where applicable a camera can be "better" because a camera sees over time rather than at the time, so visually you'll never match what a camera can see especially in light polluted areas. I'll take a ten second image of M13 over a incredibly faint (is it there?) smudge visually any day in my LP zone, in fact it's why I image, I can't see anything of significance DSO wise from a Bortle 7 even with six inch aperture.

But I do agree when you do get moments of good seeing, visual does astound at times.

A very succinct summary Elp!

As you say, sometimes features emerge that you hadn't expected. I shot my regular five minute exposure  (10.7s subs) of a reflection nebula (NGC 6914) in Cygnus a few nights ago. After the allotted time, I was beginning to see something that I hadn't expected, so I let the camera run for another 15 minutes. The result is attached.

It's far from perfect but it kept me happy!

Norris

[Norris Adams]

16 hours ago, DaveS said:

Nope, not for me. EEA lacks both the organic immediacy of eyeball to eyepiece and the ability to go deep, especially on faint galaxies, that true Deep Sky imaging provides.

Each to his own Dave!

Maybe one day I'll dip in to the deep-end!

Clear skies!

[Vroobel]

45 minutes ago, Norris Adams said:

Even though the quality is much better than anything I can produce with my own kit, the finished output didn't feel like I owned it....since I hadn't put the effort in the acquire the image - I'd done it through a middle-man. 

Maybe I'm just too 'old-school'! 

 

Yeah, I feel the same and fully agree. Yesterday I published the Crab Nebula while data wasn't mine. I cannot be fully proud of that because it's not captured in my garden using my stuff. I like the Crab, but what's the fun if I didn't need to spend hours on removing a gradient? (Bortle 2...) 😂

[carastro]

On 08/06/2024 at 10:36, Norris Adams said:but I have tried subscribing to remote telescopes and processing the images they deliver. Even though the quality is much better than anything I can produce with my own kit, the finished output didn't feel like I owned it....since I hadn't put the effort in the acquire the image - I'd done it through a middle-man. 

I totally agree.  No satisfaction if l did not take the images myself.