EA2007 Posted March 20, 2011 Share Posted March 20, 2011 From several guided images of a moonwashed Orion nebula (sorry for another 'M42' pic people), but I managed to get what I think is either a satellite trail or a meteor trail in a single sub, open to discussion.The full image is second, from 7 x 1 minute (average) subs @ ISO 800, no darks, no flats, no bungalows Stacked in DSS and played around in Canon DPP. Its my first proper autoguided image using the Orion StarShoot Autoguider, I would have gone for longer subs but I was just testing it out. Formed using the Orion ST-80 refractor and my Celestron C8 Schmidt Cassegrain. The C8 was the guide scope as its quite slow and the ST-80 was the imaging scope as I wanted a nice widefield shot with a Canon EOS 450D attached.Enjoy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
johnb Posted March 20, 2011 Share Posted March 20, 2011 Well Im no expert but I go for sattelite as its a consistent trail across the image - however happy to be corrected.John B Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ollypenrice Posted March 20, 2011 Share Posted March 20, 2011 Yes, satellite. Perfectly consistent brightness, unlike a meteor, and a single line, unlike a plane.Flats really would transform your image...Olly Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RogerTheDodger Posted March 20, 2011 Share Posted March 20, 2011 I was imaging the moon with avi's a couple of nights ago and had a bat fly past one of them Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rfdesigner Posted March 21, 2011 Share Posted March 21, 2011 Yup, probably a satelliteI note your stacked image still shows the track, you could just drop the sub with the track in it but the shot needn't be lost if you process it differently... you can stack several shots and as long as you use a statistical stacking algoritum it can ignore pixels in one frame that are too different from all the other frames before adding the remaining frames together... thus it will ignor satellite tracks, cosmic rays etc. (My last image was a stack of 483 subs, so no end of nasties and processing like this removed all of them)Also I agree with others, a flat frame would bring out no end of details.Thanks for sharing.Derek Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.