DSO image through bedroom window

[PortableAstronomer]

... with lots of light pollution.

In continuing my regular theme of astronomy for 'the rest of us', I got a bit tired of driving to a field in the middle of nowhere with my scope, and thought I would try imaging from a bedroom in the house, through the windows.

Obviously experienced astronomers will tell you "don't do it", but I thought I would give it a try anyway. At least I don't have thermal currents in the tube to worry about, or dew forming.

Here (pic1) is the view from the bedroom looking South towards Orion. Then (pic2) a raw stack from 8x4 min exposures using a QHY-8, one-shot colour, with bias and flat frames, no dark frames.

Finally (pic3) the result from various processes in PixInsight:

- Dynamic background extraction

- Histogramtransformation

- HDRWaveletTransformation

- DarkStructureEnhance

- another background subtraction then more curves

Hope you like it.

[PortableAstronomer]

I forgot to mention, imaging was done through the Equinox 80 scope.

No narrowband frames, just one-shot-colour. I'll post a H-Alpha version shortly.

I'd like to show more pictures or video showing how I get from the start point to the end point, because the transformation is quite dramatic. However you can still see a video of similar start point (very light polluted) and similar result from a session I did last year at http://portableastronomer.blip.tv/file/2322230/

[Ags]

That's brilliant!

[PortableAstronomer]

Thanks Ags, it needs a lot more depth to it though, it's limited to 4 min exposures because of the LP. I might try some longer subs next time I get a clear night, which might be 2012....

[LukeSkywatcher]

Amazing results. My sky only looks like that when it is snowing. So i guess i cant complain about LP. This image (process etc) shows me that while not the "done thing", that observing/imaging through a window really isnt all that bad.

I have noticed though that observing planets through a window does tend to screw around with the focus and colour. Observing stars,nebs etc doesnt seem to be affected.

I've observed through windows before. The trick is to not have any central heating on in the room so the room is as close to the outside temp as possible.

[PortableAstronomer]

Good point there Paul, actually I had a look at Jupiter through the scopes from the bedroom, and my very old double glazing certainly scatters the bright light everywhere and makes a mess.

For low-magnification / wide field DSO imaging , it doesn't seem to make that much of a problem. I guess it's a good excuse to get the windows cleaned and please the missus anyway.

[ncjunk]

Great image, really shows what you can achieve.

There is a lot of advice from people telling you the best way to do things but sometimes I think we are to focused on perfection. I have just seen some narrow band OSC pictures on the web...not the best way of doing it..but perfectly workable.

I am surprised you found a gap in the clouds...weathers been rubbish last couple of weeks.

[PortableAstronomer]

There is a lot of advice from people telling you the best way to do things but sometimes I think we are to focused on perfection.

Actually I did a presentation at a local club a couple of years ago on my trademark rather low-cost style of 'unconventional DSO imaging in a hurry'.

The regulars were quite fascinated to see me actually doing the image processing live, and that you can do things without Photoshop, Maxim and a Mono CCD. But the real reason why I did it was to wipe the smile off the face of a rather smug "I'm buddies with all the famous astromers" sort-of chairman. Afterwards he looked like he had chewed a wasp. That was priceless.

Needless to say, I was never invited to do a presentation again. lol

I have just seen some narrow band OSC pictures on the web...not the best way of doing it ...

I beg to differ. Actually I would hesitate to swap my QHY8 OneShot colour CCD with an Kodak 8300-based mono ccd.

The KAF8300 has smaller pixels, more noise, having to do darks, smaller chip too. And that's the mono version. The OSC version of the KAF8300-based CCD must be spectacularly bad on sensitivity.

The QE of the my Sony Super-HAD CCD sensor, even with it's bayer matrix, is surprisingly sensitive in the HA.

[dc509]

brilliant! great story and amazing image.

[LukeSkywatcher]

Good point there Paul, actually I had a look at Jupiter through the scopes from the bedroom, and my very old double glazing certainly scatters the bright light everywhere and makes a mess.

For low-magnification / wide field DSO imaging , it doesn't seem to make that much of a problem. I guess it's a good excuse to get the windows cleaned and please the missus anyway.

Clean windows also help. But then again dirty windows (within reason) are no worse then a bit of dust on the primary mirror. Your focus is way beyond the window surface so not really an issue.

I am in a wheelchair (as are a few other members of SGL) and they can not get outside as easily as i can. I find they (we) are being given the wrong advice about the perils of observing through windows............by able-bodied people.

This thread (your images) have really shown me that it is OK to do so (as i well know).

I have kept quiet in the past on this issue, but no more.

Surely the best way to do astronomy is by any method/gear that is best for you.

Sorry for going off on a tangent there.

*must clean my windows*.

[PortableAstronomer]

Well the HA certainly made the bright sky darker.

Here is a stack of 5 x 8 min exposures in HA, through the old double-glazing upstairs which wasn't particularly clean.

Equinox 80,

5x8 min exposures,

no binning

no darks

Red channel extracted, then stacked in DeepSkyStacker, then stretched in PixInsight, with a bit of HDR wavelet processing.

The bedroom pic shows the view just after the clouds moved over, when I had to stop. I'd love to get into deeper exposures but just when you're ready to set it, the clouds roll in.

To be honest I prefer the RGB image which was posted earlier. That showed just as much structure and maybe went a bit deeper. As soon as I get a clear sky again I'll be going for 20-min HA subs.

[mdstuart]

I often look out of the window with my 20 by 80mm binos. As you say for low power wide angle DSO's its fine. You stay warm and can' take your time enjoying the view.

The stars go a bit enlongated at high angles but its still observing and helps with learning the sky.

Mark

[ncjunk]

I beg to differ. Actually I would hesitate to swap my QHY8 OneShot colour CCD with an Kodak 8300-based mono ccd.

The KAF8300 has smaller pixels, more noise, having to do darks, smaller chip too. And that's the mono version. The OSC version of the KAF8300-based CCD must be spectacularly bad on sensitivity.

The QE of the my Sony Super-HAD CCD sensor, even with it's bayer matrix, is surprisingly sensitive in the HA.

Lol i am agree with you, your helping to prove my point. What i meant by not the best way is that the purists will tell you that with a mono version of the sensor against a colour version of the same sensor then you should go for the mono but this often gets misinterpreted as you must buy a mono...then a filter wheel...then filters...oh and your mounts a bit rubbish you won't get perfect results with that so get a new one.

Sometimes no one stops to ask what is acceptable for you...and if thats a dslr with astrotrack through an open window then perfect.

Most people wouldnt do what you have tried because people would gasp in horror mention thermals...reflections...and possible carpet burns as reasons why you shouldnt bother...

Mas o menos.

Saludos!

[PortableAstronomer]

Thanks Neil for that refreshing perspective.

What I love about this site reading how other people do the unconventional, the DIY, the "you shouldn't really do this but..." etc.. Shame that the presentation of such interesting stuff gets blocked at some astronomy club meetings by purist committees.

I am sure I am not the only one on this site who thinks this, but I find the most interesting threads on SGL are the ones that show modest results from budget equipment, DIY setups, innovation/the unconventional, or prooving results from unfavourable environments. That inspires people.

We get lots of amazing pictures posted here too on the Imaging threads, much better than I produce, but then the people never explain how they processed it, or show us what sort of skies they have. Otherwise we don't get perspective on what work has gone into it.

I mean, if I wanted to see an ultra-deep spectacular DSO image then I would look on the Hubble or Keck pictures. What's the point in posting a super-rich field, super sharp and colourful pictures onto a forum if nobody has anything to learn from it? No tips, no "this is what I used to process it", no mention of challenges that they faced. etc.. Bit of a shame but then again it's just my opinion.

Then there were the days of attending club meetings with slideshows of someone with a supermassive CCD and Paramount mount in a rural observatory and talking down their nose to everyone else is a put-off. They've done great work to earn that stuff, but it's not inspiring. What annoys me is not the show-off $$$ imagers themselves, but the masses of followers who lick their proverbials. Not sure what your opinions are.

[Earl]

Awesome !!!

[MartinB]

Well you've certainly demonstrated you can image in comfort! That's a fine effort. Would certainly be worth trying to blend in the Ha.

I am sure I am not the only one on this site who thinks this, but I find the most interesting threads on SGL are the ones that show modest results from budget equipment, DIY setups, innovation/the unconventional, or prooving results from unfavourable environments. That inspires people.

The ingenuity of the SGL members never ceases to amaze me!

We get lots of amazing pictures posted here too on the Imaging threads, much better than I produce, but then the people never explain how they processed it, or show us what sort of skies they have. Otherwise we don't get perspective on what work has gone into it.

I mean, if I wanted to see an ultra-deep spectacular DSO image then I would look on the Hubble or Keck pictures. What's the point in posting a super-rich field, super sharp and colourful pictures onto a forum if nobody has anything to learn from it? No tips, no "this is what I used to process it", no mention of challenges that they faced. etc.. Bit of a shame but then again it's just my opinion.

I'm not sure this is true. The norm seems to be to explain the equipment and software used, some exposure details and the problems they encountered. I'm sure most posters of images would be happy to go into more detail if asked but not everyone wants to read lengthy descriptions of processing routines used.

Then there were the days of attending club meetings with slideshows of someone with a supermassive CCD and Paramount mount in a rural observatory and talking down their nose to everyone else is a put-off. They've done great work to earn that stuff, but it's not inspiring. What annoys me is not the show-off $$$ imagers themselves, but the masses of followers who lick their proverbials. Not sure what your opinions are.

It sounds like you've been unfortunate in your choice of astro club meetings! I've never encountered this attitude at Chesterfield astro soc. In any equipment dependent hobby there will always be people who just have to have the best kit, either as a result of one upmanship or, more positively, because people want to get the best results they possibly can.

I agree with you that it is important for people to appreciate that you can image without spending a fortune. I'm currently planning doing some imaging with a £150 2nd hand Super Polaris, a Canon 1000D and a 200mm M42 lens bought off ebay for £20. If people want to spend tens of thousands on state of the art gear good luck to them. I'd like to bet that most images with fancy gear are very dedicated to the hobby and would do good work with budget kit.

[themos]

I love this! Could you get before-and-after pictures of the same bit of sky, inside and outside?

[angusb1]

How did you polar align?

[PortableAstronomer]

Could you get before-and-after pictures of the same bit of sky, inside and outside?

That's an interesting point. I wonder how different it would be.

Outside in the back yard, the view of the sky is very limited due to trees etc.. so I wouldn't be able to see M42 out there because it's too low down. And for something nearer the zenith such as M81/M82 then I won't be able to see it through the window. If a DSO comes along which is 45 degrees elevation I will try just that.

[geordieskies]

Wow! amazing images from indoors. This will be very handy in windy conditions too. :-)

[ollypenrice]

This is amazing. I mean, the image is very good and for the sub length, had someone said to me, 'Was this taken through a bedroom window?' I would have said, 'Is your name Jeremy Clarkson? Bedroom window indeed!' But it was. Well, blow me.

Olly

[xboxdevil]

Your imaging is through a double glazed window is a breath of fresh air, if this is unconventional astronomy then I like it.

Keep up the good work!

[PortableAstronomer]

Thanks to everyone for your kind responses. Next time I get clear skies I will try the Rosette in HA and RGB, through the Window. And as soon as I can I will try to compare indoor and outdoor stacks on the same object.

xboxdevil: I like the pun in your comment. Well after a curry and a few beers, and ... paarp, my missus will tell you it's definately *not* a breath of fresh air.

[russ]

That's brilliant!

My thoughts too.

I agree with you that it is important for people to appreciate that you can image without spending a fortune. I'm currently planning doing some imaging with a £150 2nd hand Super Polaris, a Canon 1000D and a 200mm M42 lens bought off ebay for £20. If people want to spend tens of thousands on state of the art gear good luck to them. I'd like to bet that most images with fancy gear are very dedicated to the hobby and would do good work with budget kit.

That's currently my plan too Martin. Only with a £70 EQ5, £70 300D and a £12 M42 lens.

[MikeWilson]

How did you polar align?

This is excellent and unique work but I am also puzzled by the lack of polar alignment!

And... did you go >through< the window or somehow open it? Any problem with reflections?