Probably the worst picture of the milky way to this day+other crusty stuff

[ELS]

Looks like it's from 1979 or something
Canon 400D @ 25mm F4.0 ISO3000 and 15 second exposure.
It should improve a lot once I get a startracker with longer exposures. and or a wider lens.... But it's pretty descent for what it is.
I also attached the raw file if anyone's interested in looking at a black image

Unfortunately darktable doesn't seem to have a debanding module so there's that problem.

IMG_9356.CR2

Edited August 2 by ELS

[Paul M]

Good start. The stars are sharp so not suffering much trailing. 

I'd say the next step would be to take a bunch of images like that and stack them DSS or similar software. 

The Milky Way is my nemesis, Not yet made a publishable image of it, so you are ahead of me!

 

[ELS]

41 minutes ago, Paul M said:

Good start. The stars are sharp so not suffering much trailing. 

I'd say the next step would be to take a bunch of images like that and stack them DSS or similar software. 

The Milky Way is my nemesis, Not yet made a publishable image of it, so you are ahead of me!

 

Well it was quite clear the night I took the picture, I could clearly see it with my bare eyes even.
In a way the camera had a harder time seeing it than me
I don't like stacking because the free stacking programs are a nightmare to use in my experience...
Also apart for Siril (but even then) they don't have very good modules. I like darktable since I can enhance the very underexposed and noisy images a ton, while with the stacking programs I'm left to processing the exported one... I guess I could stack individual exported darktable images but that would be an even bigger nightmare than it already is.

Since my current images aren't much to write home about, I'll attach some other passable ones I took earlier this year instead of making a new thread:

There's a 10x8" stack @ 3000ISO, 300mm, f5.6 of Antares and Messier 4 beside it which came out pretty amazing, taken in the middle of May. Even can see a bit of NGC6144
Stacked it using Siril, then adjusted the luminance curve more in paint.net

There's a 22x10" stack of Andromeda, settings the same as before. This time stacked using Sirilic
Afterwards adjusted the lum curve in paint.net.
I did also take a shot at capturing M33 but apart for a slight change in the noise patterns, there's nothing. I'll try to take another shot now that the sky's clearer and it's further from the horizon, but I'm just aiming it by eye, and at the small FOV it's not easy to get it in frame.
In fact this picture of andromeda was sort of pointed by eye too, I could only see the star at 7 o clock, not even the one on the right.
I did take some pictures of andromeda at the same time I took the milky way one but I've yet to stack them.

There's also one I took even earlier.  I was messing around with various attempts to boost the SNR. You can see at the top the stacked one which I thought was a dud before I tried post-processing it in paint.net.

Edited August 1 by ELS

[ELS]

Well I processed the andromeda pictures I took the same day, 14*4" exposures, this is the result... The color is more accurate but with this short of an exposure the galaxy just isn't bright enough to get over the noise floor.
Btw I used DSS not Sirilic for the previous (and this) picture. I also found that it has a setting to remove hot pixels. Also the automatic star mapping + offsets finally worked and I didn't need to manually set them. So I guess it ain't that bad after all

[happy-kat]

Hi could check out this YT on imaging Andromeda with a lens and static tripod, Forrest Tanaka https://youtu.be/e0JSTF8SGi4?si=PiQZByZnVcOaL4i2 

There is another stacker which is great if you do any milky way shots with foreground scenery, sequator

 

[Elp]

You've got a result which is the important thing, but now to refine.

15s is too long, even at 25mm, you can tell with your star trails. You need to dial the exposure back.

Iso3000 is also way too high, you'll only introduce excessive amounts of noise (gain or iso is only an electronic amplifier to the received light, it doesn't increase sensitivity at all and cannot cheat the laws of physics) when I had a Canon I didn't go above 1600.

I'd advise to also get a tracker, even if you DIY your own barndoor.

You can take short exposures, but you need thousands to get any sort of result and stacking them is the way to go, DSS and Siril are incredibly easy to use (especially the former). In fact I saw a YT video fairly recently where the person was using two cameras, one I think 30s tracked, the other 10s or so fixed, the latter didn't pick up much other than stars, you'll get far more of a result with tracking. The only DSO targets I'd attempt fixed are M31 Andromeda galaxy and M42 Orion nebula as they're so bright, but without tracking you'll struggle to get any outer details.

[happy-kat]

other examples that are bright to try are M45 Pleiades, M44 beehive and M42 Orion if using a static tripod

 

[ELS]

3 hours ago, Elp said:

You've got a result which is the important thing, but now to refine.

15s is too long, even at 25mm, you can tell with your star trails. You need to dial the exposure back.

Iso3000 is also way too high, you'll only introduce excessive amounts of noise (gain or iso is only an electronic amplifier to the received light, it doesn't increase sensitivity at all and cannot cheat the laws of physics) when I had a Canon I didn't go above 1600.

I'd advise to also get a tracker, even if you DIY your own barndoor.

You can take short exposures, but you need thousands to get any sort of result and stacking them is the way to go, DSS and Siril are incredibly easy to use (especially the former). In fact I saw a YT video fairly recently where the person was using two cameras, one I think 30s tracked, the other 10s or so fixed, the latter didn't pick up much other than stars, you'll get far more of a result with tracking. The only DSO targets I'd attempt fixed are M31 Andromeda galaxy and M42 Orion nebula as they're so bright, but without tracking you'll struggle to get any outer details.

Well with the small aperture 15" makes it so there's barely any elongation and only in the middle. And since the SNR is the main limiting factor, I'd rather crank the exposure even if it distorts a bit.
I found that the noise becomes invariant above 1600 so I maxed it out... The bloom sort of compensates the loss of DNR on brighter stars