Free osc data sets?

[TiffsAndAstro]

Due to all the fabulous clear nights I've been having and not wanting to flog the dead horses of my own data, I was hoping to find some decent osc data to practice with but I'm struggling.

I'm going through cn and astrobin "manually" because most of my searches turn up lrgb ha type sets or pure narrow band, which is beyond my abilities for now.

Anyone got a link to some nebulary osc data somewhere.

I've looked at the Liverpool telescope archive and it's amazing but not suitable for me yet.

[Vroobel]

I can share my data with you, both from Canon 6D and ASI2600MC, but give me some time.

Don't forget to mention that they are mine data, if you want to publish your results somewhere.  

 

Edited June 9 by Vroobel

[TiffsAndAstro]

35 minutes ago, Vroobel said:

I can share my data with you, both from Canon 6D and ASI2600MC, but give me some time.

Don't forget to mention that they are mine data, if you want to publish your results somewhere.  

 

that's very kind of you. i don't plan on publishing anything just practice, but id ask you about it first if i did

it really is just more for something to pass the time, practice and work flow organising. not sure how you'd make it available could be quite big? my internet is decent though about 250Mb/s

[Vroobel]

It's not about the speed but the amount of data. All data will be shared at Google Drive, so you can download them when you want and as fast as you can. 

[TiffsAndAstro]

1 hour ago, Vroobel said:

It's not about the speed but the amount of data. All data will be shared at Google Drive, so you can download them when you want and as fast as you can. 

i got some good stuff via astro bin having a go right now.

[Elp]

ESA has a handful of Hubble, mono but some are pre aligned I believe, all you have to do is "stamp visible" (ps term) as long as you have assigned each layer to their respective colour channel and you have a single RGB image to play with.

[Vroobel]

Based on my recently obtained experience, playing with the perfect data from professional or scientific instruments may not bring pleasure as it's too easy. Struggling with data collected under a real city sky gives a chance to learn how to deal with gradients, background colours etc. But it's my opinion only.

[Hals]

While I can certainly see the appeal of processing professional data sets, personally I'm old school: I like to have captured the data myself with my own equipment, whatever it's and my own shortcomings.

However, I certainly do not frown on anyone doing so, it's each to his/her own. There's plenty of sky for everyone.  Again, as above, my opinion only.

Pete.

[Elp]

If doing individual, the best and quickest dso data to capture is open or closed star clusters. You can normally do it with 30-60mins of data. You still need to histogram stretch, colour correct, address star sizes etc, can even add in post diffraction spikes if imaged via refractor type optics.

[TiffsAndAstro]

48 minutes ago, Elp said:

ESA has a handful of Hubble, mono but some are pre aligned I believe, all you have to do is "stamp visible" (ps term) as long as you have assigned each layer to their respective colour channel and you have a single RGB image to play with.

i might give that a go, but i think its a little advance for me atm

[TiffsAndAstro]

14 minutes ago, Hals said:

While I can certainly see the appeal of processing professional data sets, personally I'm old school: I like to have captured the data myself with my own equipment, whatever it's and my own shortcomings.

However, I certainly do not frown on anyone doing so, it's each to his/her own. There's plenty of sky for everyone.  Again, as above, my opinion only.

Pete.

just want to do it for some practice. its either that or redo the few of my own i have that i've already stretched on a rack, flogged, drawn and quartered too many times

[TiffsAndAstro]

6 minutes ago, Elp said:

If doing individual, the best and quickest dso data to capture is open or closed star clusters. You can normally do it with 30-60mins of data. You still need to histogram stretch, colour correct, address star sizes etc, can even add in post diffraction spikes if imaged via refractor type optics.

not keen on adding stuff, even though i did just that (badly) to hide a dust mote. was just after some decent nebula data to practice my workflow on and compare results.

after a quick play with someone's triffid/lagoon nebula, i think i  have my own 'style' of result. which i got three times each on redoing my own ngc7000 and nelly the elephant trunk nebula. while i'd like to think that makes me a maverick free spirit with no bounds artist, i think it more likely a limit on my skills and free tools. probably 99% the former ;( 

still, what else could i be doing apart from destroying a broken old tripod for its m6 looking bolts and then maybe breaking my scope with them 

[TiffsAndAstro]

36 minutes ago, Vroobel said:

Based on my recently obtained experience, playing with the perfect data from professional or scientific instruments may not bring pleasure as it's too easy. Struggling with data collected under a real city sky gives a chance to learn how to deal with gradients, background colours etc. But it's my opinion only.

honestly (and this is just my opinion as i don't even have the skills to know "data from professional or scientific instruments" when im looking at it) you probably have more than enough procesing skills if you came to that opinion. if that makes any sense? 

the triffid/lagoon data from astrobin user im practicing with is clearly so far in advance of the data i generate myself, but the end result is remarkably similar to when i process my own data, i think it means im not being limited by my own data (relatively bad as it is) but all my other skills. maybe my opensource/free tools, too, but i'm loathed to criticise those free tools because they're incredible and invaluable to noobs like myself. there is literally no chance of me paying £500 for pixinsight and some addons instead of using it to get a better camera, nano pc or other stuff. doesn't mean i won't go down the pi route in the future. 

im also certain that is probably naive but im newish so that gives me a slight excuse

[Elp]

6 minutes ago, TiffsAndAstro said:

i'm loathed to criticise those free tools because they're incredible and invaluable to noobs like myself

I still use free software other than Topaz (Gmic for gimp works just as well but it isn't as subtle as topaz), I refuse to pay such an amount "just" to process astro images, much better for ones skillset to be able to image edit any photo as at least you can apply such skills to other walks of life.

[TiffsAndAstro]

9 minutes ago, Elp said:

I still use free software other than Topaz (Gmic for gimp works just as well but it isn't as subtle as topaz), I refuse to pay such an amount "just" to process astro images, much better for ones skillset to be able to image edit any photo as at least you can apply such skills to other walks of life.

which other walks of life?  can't see me re-using any skills i might pick up elsewhere. 

and i sort of just discovered unpurple in gmic. its not perfect, but i've hardly used it much. hopefully i'll find other useful addons like unpurple, but still need to learn gimp more first. masks and folding high pass info back into starless looks powerful, for example.

[Elp]

17 minutes ago, TiffsAndAstro said:

which other walks of life?

If you're a keen photographer for example, or make a living off image/video creation, learning manual software will benefit in this regard. It's also why I don't use scripts, you're not really learning much by doing it, fault finding is also easier if you process manually step by step, I also find it more rewarding because I've put the effort in as with anything you'd make yourself.

Edited June 9 by Elp

[TiffsAndAstro]

1 minute ago, Elp said:

If you're a keen photographer for example, or make a living off image/video creation, learning manual software will benefit in this regard. It's also why I don't use scripts, you're not really learning much by doing it, fault finding is also easier if you process manually step by step, I also find it more rewarding because I've put the effort in as with anything you'd make yourself.

ah yeah fair enough. sadly, im crap at photography, never could get good at composition and stuff, even though i've had some talented colleagues try in the past

at least in astrophotograhy not too much changes in a scene so i can just move my fov etc. ill never be good at that, but should be ok enough for me at some point. 

and i do agree with you about doing it manually, but im still 'semi manual' at the moment - i run a script in sirirl to stack then use the pp_lights to redo it all and take advantage of the plot and stuff. that alone make a big difference from purely using a script.

[Elp]

I've said it previously I think most of the effort is post processing, but good data helps. Just the other day I had multiple setup issues, and then simplified and only ended up with 30 mins data. I captured the target but the data is garbage, I wouldn't even use it to stack with other stacks. So redoing and chalking it up as practice is the way to go forward in such instances.

[TiffsAndAstro]

18 minutes ago, Elp said:

I've said it previously I think most of the effort is post processing, but good data helps. Just the other day I had multiple setup issues, and then simplified and only ended up with 30 mins data. I captured the target but the data is garbage, I wouldn't even use it to stack with other stacks. So redoing and chalking it up as practice is the way to go forward in such instances.

I spent 15 minutes last night trying to work out why my usb hub wasn't working.

It's extension cable wasn't fully pushed in. Makes me a tad concerned about getting more complicated gear

[bottletopburly]

Try  googling  Dslr Astro image processing , it’s a group on io they have lots of data sets on there really helpful group .

 

[tomato]

22 hours ago, Vroobel said:

Based on my recently obtained experience, playing with the perfect data from professional or scientific instruments may not bring pleasure as it's too easy. Struggling with data collected under a real city sky gives a chance to learn how to deal with gradients, background colours etc. But it's my opinion only.

I agree, good professional data almost processes itself, but in my experience externally sourced data can vary widely in quality, even when you pay for it. I had a set from Chile which to be fair was captured with a CCD but it had a big light gradient (moonlit sky?) and several bad columns. HST data can sometimes have terrible joins if it is a mosaic, be noisy and suffer from detector artefacts, but I guess you don't look free data in the mouth, so to speak,  especially from such a venerable source.

[mackiedlm]

If you are still looking for data to practice on, go here.

https://www.cloudynights.com/topic/862495-process-my-data-thread/?fromsearch=1

This thread contains a mountain of stacked raw images of every possible type. Including some of my own. Look for posts by zambiadarkskies, he's put in loads of osc data from southern hemisphere that we will never get up here.

This is one of his datasets processed by me

https://astrob.in/7d0h6j/0/

[TiffsAndAstro]

16 minutes ago, mackiedlm said:

If you are still looking for data to practice on, go here.

https://www.cloudynights.com/topic/862495-process-my-data-thread/?fromsearch=1

This thread contains a mountain of stacked raw images of every possible type. Including some of my own. Look for posts by zambiadarkskies, he's put in loads of osc data from southern hemisphere that we will never get up here.

This is one of his datasets processed by me

https://astrob.in/7d0h6j/0/

I'd love to image tho Ophiuchi but highest it gets is like 20 degrees for me so no chance.

Tu for the link to data. Will have a good look and hopefully I will eventually be able to get my own data up to those sorts of quality.