Jump to content

Banner.jpg.b89429c566825f6ab32bcafbada449c9.jpg

First time trying deep sky imaging!

quantum64

By quantum64
in Imaging - Deep Sky

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 96
  • Created
  • Last Reply
Tim

Tim

Posted
Posted
I'm no imager by any stretch of the imagination but i have serious doubts that an image of this quality can be gotten by such means.

Correct me if i am wrong.

OK, you're wrong ;)

The very first time I pointed my first proper scope at M42 and took a 30 sec exposure it came out just like this, which is what made me get the bug in the first place :)

I was very pleased to see this image personally, and would likely have chosen it as POW too, for the very reason Rob did, it just goes to show you dont need to spend your kids inheritance to get a decent piccy. Thanks for sharing it Kyle :)

Tim

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Vega

Vega

Posted
Posted

Just compared it to my first ever M42.... what can i say.. You wiped the floor with this! Amazing single shot. This must have you hooked now (I hope so cus I wann see what you can pull out the bag after a few more goes :-O ) :(

Matt

Link to comment
Share on other sites
quantum64

quantum64

Posted
  • Author
Posted
what model webcam did you use for your planet shots?

I'm not sure which model of Logitech it is, but here is a picture of the webcam. I'm pretty sure it is just a CMOS based on the poor quality of images I am getting. Here is a pic of the webcam. I hot glued a piece of sanded down PVC on it. :(

IMG_2240.JPG

Link to comment
Share on other sites
RobB

RobB

Posted
Posted

Wow - An inspiration to all us budding imagers to just try it! In my case I'm a returning imager (from when hyper'ing B/W film was all the rage). This site is reavaluating what is possible.

LukeSkywatcher's initial skepticism is the best praise possible

Well Done

Link to comment
Share on other sites
yesyes

yesyes

Posted
Posted
So let me get this right. If i take my Sony Alpha 200, take off the lens and "strap it" to my telescope, set it to 1600 ISO, and 30 second exposure i may get a result like this?

You might. You would still need to process the raw image in something like Photoshop to bring out some more detail.

And you forgot one step: point the scope at M42... ;-)

Link to comment
Share on other sites
riogrande100

riogrande100

Posted
Posted

Am I the only one that thinks the guy is just chatting pure breeze! I mean 1600 iso on a rebel produces noise! And the fact this image looks smooth says that some post processing was done which will always reduce a little sharpness!

Also I have imaged Orion numerous times using an ED80 and never got that close, maybe with a 1500mm scope I could, but that would have to be tracked! And at that Focal length would need perfect polar alignment!

Furthermore unless this was taken in a very dark site I fail to see how in a light polluted environment you picked up nebulosity of the running man, and yet 0 light pollution!

And tyign with a hairband will cause some flexure yet the stars are pinpoint! So excuse me for me being skeptical but this is an object I have had a lot of experience with and from personal and shared experience this image is not plausible from a first time shot of M42!

Link to comment
Share on other sites
David Galvin

David Galvin

Posted
Posted

........ this image is not plausible from a first time shot of M42!

So what are you saying :)

Perhaps others may like to repeat the method and see what results they obtain.

If the OP says that is how he did it then fine, should that person be given a hard time or a pat on the back for producing something from a very basic Heath Robinson set up.:( This will encourage those who do not have fancy gear to have a go,

Respect from Dave G.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
quantum64

quantum64

Posted
  • Author
Posted
Am I the only one that thinks the guy is just chatting pure breeze! I mean 1600 iso on a rebel produces noise! And the fact this image looks smooth says that some post processing was done which will always reduce a little sharpness!

Also I have imaged Orion numerous times using an ED80 and never got that close, maybe with a 1500mm scope I could, but that would have to be tracked! And at that Focal length would need perfect polar alignment!

Furthermore unless this was taken in a very dark site I fail to see how in a light polluted environment you picked up nebulosity of the running man, and yet 0 light pollution!

And tyign with a hairband will cause some flexure yet the stars are pinpoint! So excuse me for me being skeptical but this is an object I have had a lot of experience with and from personal and shared experience this image is not plausible from a first time shot of M42!

Check out my website, you can see the ones with light polution. You can see how much light polution is gathered at 1600 iso. I reduced the redness by taking some red out and adjusted the contrast and brightness in photoshop. That was relatively easy though.

It took a lot to get the stars from dragging. I just kept tweaking the alignment until I got it perfect. Finally, I got one without the dragging. The hairbands just held the camera to the scope. Not sure why that would cause flexure.

I'm not sure what more evidence I can provide. I assure you though, I was just as suprised to see this. To be honest, i didn't know what to expect. I just worked with the telescope and camera settings until things started to appear. Once I got it, I was able to get series of great shots. This was the best of the bunch. With some slirght red reduction and brightness/contrast changes. I got this.

I would be happy to take pictures of my full setup and exactly how I took the pictures. I'll try to post them soon.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
riogrande100

riogrande100

Posted
Posted
Check out my website, you can see the ones with light polution. You can see how much light polution is gathered at 1600 iso. I reduced the redness by taking some red out and adjusted the contrast and brightness in photoshop. That was relatively easy though.

It took a lot to get the stars from dragging. I just kept tweaking the alignment until I got it perfect. Finally, I got one without the dragging. The hairbands just held the camera to the scope. Not sure why that would cause flexure.

I'm not sure what more evidence I can provide. I assure you though, I was just as suprised to see this. To be honest, i didn't know what to expect. I just worked with the telescope and camera settings until things started to appear. Once I got it, I was able to get series of great shots. This was the best of the bunch. With some slirght red reduction and brightness/contrast changes. I got this.

I would be happy to take pictures of my full setup and exactly how I took the pictures. I'll try to post them soon.

That is more plausible saying that you took a few shots at first and worked and trying to get everything right and not, o i just popped outside and took my first pic of DSO and came out with this pic (which is very nice)!

Link to comment
Share on other sites
quantum64

quantum64

Posted
  • Author
Posted

This image was of a series from my first time ever using a DSLR for imaging deep sky objects. I personally appologize for misleading anyone thinking this was my VERY FIRST shot with a DSLR. In that very first shot, you are likely to see a lot of dragging.

I'm completely new to this. This was my first real attempt at getting an image. I had plenty of dragging images. Once I got things aligned and adjusted. I was able to get a series of shots that was worth sharing. :(

To be clear. This was not the first click of the camera. This was the best shot I got in that series. Honestly, it only took about a half hour to get the scope aligned properly. I also made sure the 3-star alignment was perfect. I hope this helps and I certainly didn't mean to mislead anyone.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
quantum64

quantum64

Posted
  • Author
Posted
I stand corrected. Sorry for any insult caused by my original comment.

It really is a cracking image.

Thank you LukSkywatcher. I understand the skepticism. I had no clue the image would generate so much attention. I appreciate your compliments, and hope to post my complete setup, as to legitimize how I took the photo.

Maybe it's these clear Arizona skies. :(

Link to comment
Share on other sites
RobH

RobH

Posted
Posted

Roigrande100.

The authenticity of this image has been verified by several very experienced imagers on the mod and admin team.

Kindly desist in what amounts to defaming Quantum64.

This behaviour will not be tolerated.

Rob

Link to comment
Share on other sites
brantuk

brantuk

Posted
Posted

If you take 2000 subs of an object in your first session with any particular camera, then I would still regard any single frame or stack of frames as a first attempt on that object with that gear. The wording "first shot" is used very losely in these terms.

As it is - I'm more than happy it's a "first shot", and I still think it's a cracking good one as per my early comments in the thread. Well done Quantum :(

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue. By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.