Ol' longface and the Flame - first attempt

[namreg]

I wasn't going to post this.

I have processed this thing to death, stretched it far too much, and clipped it in all sorts of places, but having said all that I'm sort of pleased. At least you can see what it is!

Had terrible trouble with ice (Saturday night) and had to bin most of the subs as Alnitak looked like it was peering through frosted glass (even more so than it does now), so this is just 16x60second frames (hence the reason I had to stretch it to death). I took 90. Also the master dark didn't fit anymore as I took the darks at the end (all iced up!)

My next attempt will be better (I hope)

16 x 60 second subs

20 darks

20 bias

10 flats

On my diy modded full spectrum Nikon D70, 200p, EQ5 unguided. DSS and processed til it squeaked in CS5.

[ncjunk]

Thats nothing to be ashamed about, it's a fine image. Everything looks good so just keep adding subs!

[oldfruit]

Despite the problems you mention it is still a nice image, and like you say, it is easy to see what it is.

[ollypenrice]

Well let's get one thing clear for starters; that Alnitak is one of the best, or the best, I have ever seen. It is a cleanly split double with no significant bloat and data showing behind it. I'm not a spikes fan but I have spent literally days trying to work out how to control that star and here you have it, bang wallop.

So now you need more nebulosity and that means longer subs. Whatever you do, keep this image in Hi Res format because you have a stunning solution to the hardest part of the picture, Alnitak. You will be able to layer it onto a deeper image at some stage. This little problem is certainly a reflector strong point.

Am I exaggerating? Here is Gendler on the subject. Do you see a double?

Untitled Document

Olly

[namreg]

Cheers guys for the encouraging comments.

Tell you what Olly, I didn't even know Alnitak WAS a double. I thought that was an artefact! Showing my ignorance. And you're right, there's no double in that link you posted. That's made my day!

I'll certainly be keeping the subs. Can't increase the subs much as I'm unguided but I might be able to squeeze 90 secs if I'm prepared to bin a lot. Not enough I know, but we have to work with the tools we have.

Considering there's only 16 minutes of exposure in this one I suppose it's quite a good result really, even though I had to take a few liberties in PS.

[Shibby]

Great stuff Doug!

Fascinating to see what the D70 can manage when modified. And in only 16 minutes; very encouraging!

[namreg]

Go for it Lewis - it's easy (!). You can always put the thing back in again!

No predicted focussing issues as far as I can tell.

[Shibby]

I really want to... Only problem is, I don't own the camera! It's on "long term" loan from a friend!

Did you use an IR cut filter, by the way?

[namreg]

He/she won't mind!

Nope, totally naked sensor

[namreg]

Added just 4 subs I took in an abandoned attempt after my AM3 intervalometer fell to bits!

Reprocessed and cropped as the alignment in the added subs was the other way up! DSS handles it though!

I prefer this version. Rough around the edges I know, and whatever you do don't use zoom!

[davew]

I prefer this version. Rough around the edges I know, and whatever you do don't use zoom!

So what's the first thing I did ? Zoomed in. Worth every click.

When posters ask if they can image with a D70 I'm going to link to this shot.

I still don't understand how you get a Newt to behave so well on an EQ5.

Dave.

[namreg]

I still don't understand how you get a Newt to behave so well on an EQ5.

I give it a little stroke now and again and never shout at it. That seems to work.