Non Imager turns to the Dark Side on M42

[issdaol]

Hi All,

I am experimenting with AP on a very irregular basis and sticking to the following general parameters:

1. Single Shot Exposures
2. Using both Native FL and Reducer/Flattener
3. All manual exposures using both in camera JPG or RAW's
4. No Post Processing
5. No Guiding
6. No Stacking

So with no AP experience this first shot was taken using the following:

1. Canon 6D (Un-moded) at prime focus
2. Mewlon 300 at native FL of 11.9 (old non CRS version)
3. No Flattener/Reducer

Focus needs improvement as it was done using in camera live view. Also I triggered the shot manual which resulted in a bit of vibration.

The shot was 30 seconds at ISO1600 unguided and unprocessed.

Mount was Takahashi EM400 with single star alignment, no guiding or multipoint model.

Fully expecting to get lambasted on my amateurish efforts :P

Cheers

http://astrob.in/full/329480/0/?nc=TheFaceLessMen&real=

[LewisM]

MMMMM basted lamb....

Got mint sauce?

[issdaol]

:p

[Peter Ward]

Even the greats e.g. Ansel Adams (landscapes), David Malin (the universe) , applied darkroom wizardry or “post processing” to their images, hence I am puzzled as to why you would want to approach astrophotography...which means photographing objects brighter than the Sun and darker than the night... in the same frame....in a manner beyond the capabilities of any sensor currently available.

The core of M42 is bright, so much so that the very real filigree tendrils in the nebula are lost in the glare of the headlights....

So, sure, you can choose to show only the headlights...but so much more can be revealed by even just a mild logarithmic stretch of the data.

For me, this is where astrophotography surprises and delights. To leave these details in the shadows has no point IMHO

[LewisM]

There's a fair bit in that single image, WHEN you stretch it without OVER-STRETCHING it.

[issdaol]

I completely appreciate the work of those greats that you mention and others on here that do outstanding images :thumbsup:

As to the point:

I am simply experimenting to see what can be achieved with my current equipment and without having to resort to any additional processing/enhancement.

[Kunama]

:shrug: Et tu, Brute :shrug:

[LewisM]

The Force is weak in him. He will not suffice. Discard him :lol:

[Peter Ward]

Well...OK... I've had my two cents worth...but it seems to me, it's like how an Amish person might approach astro-photography :shrug:

[bigjoe]

Hi Phil.
Since your doing this for your own pleasure , and as an experiment.. why not I say.
bigjoe.

[LewisM]

Box Brownie whilst wearing a black hat, blue shirt, suspenders and black pants? Yup, that's Phil.

he drives a horse and sulky out to the observatory to...:rofl:

[raymo]

I ended up in a scenario just a tad more complex than Issadao's,
but not by choice.
I spent more than 50yrs doing AP the traditional way, hypered film,
dodging and burning, manual guiding etc, etc: When the digital age
took over AP completely I was already almost 70, and at the very best
computer demi semi literate.
I managed all the basics o.k. but had huge problems trying to convert
RAW files and AVIs. I would convert to AVI only to discover that there were myriad codecs, and god knew which one I needed, so first compromise, I
stuck to JPEGS.
I tried PS, but the dozens, scores, even hundreds, of steps required to produce an image completely overwhelmed my addled brain.
Second compromise, I stuck to DSS and Registax.
Third compromise; I was never going to produce fine digital images, so
camera noise reduction activated, so no separate darks, no bias, no flats,
unguided up to 90sec subs.
I ended up just a little bit proud of what I managed to produce with this
primitive setup and method.
octoraymo

[bigjoe]

Dont know Phil but......
Couldnt this be Phil , doing this in months.

https://www.google.com.au/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://m.youtube.com/watch%3Fv%3DaHi4ddBjwNY&ved=0ahUKEwjUm9ehhNrYAhVIUbwKHfbNDH sQtwIITjAK&usg=AOvVaw0dH8X1RxvU9-UV3CYtMBDQ

.then showing his detractors the results.

PS: May have been more prudent to have wacked it in the beginers section.
bigjoe

[LewisM]

https://images-eu.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/I/516hPeG31qL._UY250_.jpg

[xelasnave]

Hi Phil
You did well I supose to get your shot given you say you managed the shutter manualy.
Perhaps consider remote shutter control and stacking as your next step.
The stacking program Deep Sky Stacker is a free download and with it you can stack, which is very exciting, and do a little proceesing on the stacked image.
Alex

[xelasnave]

And Phil as Big Joe suggests the beginers astro photography section would be the most appropriate section to present your work.
Alex

[LewisM]

Me thinks some are taking this a little too seriously, especially given what Phil said in his post :lol:

Phil becoming an imager would be like Kunama becoming a dwarf.

[LewisM]

That's the whole gist of it.

[issdaol]

Thanks :) I might consider some stacking of a few single frames ...any suggestions for Mac stacking software ??



:thumbsup:



Yes just a sticking to the basics experiment for pleasure....Im not aiming for any imaging awards


Definitely valuing the input on how to stick to the basic non-post processing (My Amish Imaging :lol: ) or very limited processing suggestions to improve things .......I am of course guessing that adding guiding or multipoint model will help.

[bigjoe]

Phil heres an article on running the windows software so you can use .. eg DSS or backyard EOS on your Mac.
www.macworld.co.uk/how-to/mac/how-run-windows-on-mac-vmware-boot-camp-virtualbox-3497251.
bigjoe.

[doppler]

Everyone's missing the obvious, that's a damn good effort to capture that at f 11.9

[Kunama]

Well said Rick :thumbsup:

I thought the image achieved what the imager set out to do quite well.
(references to Amish ???? Sounds a little Prima-Donnish)

[Peter Ward]

Is this the Sean Spicer take on this?

i.e. no actual effort at all (no darks, flats, guiding, focusing, field corrector, stacking, processing etc.etc. )

being a deemed "dammed good" effort :rofl:

[Peter Ward]

Call me Blackadder.

Who once commented that "it started badly, it tailed off a little in the middle and the less said about the end the better — but apart from that it was excellent."

[LewisM]

Oh this is turning out rather quaint.

[doppler]

"Lucky imaging" at it's best ?

[LewisM]

Lucky Luciano...

[Peter Ward]

If Phil is happy with his images...good...it really matters not what anyone else thinks, in the grand scheme of things.

I'm simply not into PC.....which reminds me....Baldrick! I have a cunning plan for my next image! :D

[LewisM]

It's like comparing Airbus to Boeing - with Phil's effort being Airbus...

[issdaol]

Thanks



Within the constraints I set for the experiment and my first ever astro image, it turned out better than I thought it would .......I was expecting a lot worse lol



Perhaps your misunderstanding of the intent meant you have misread or didn't understand the first post ??

[Atmos]

You've picked up the core nicely Phil, only so much you can do in 30s :lol:

[LewisM]

You do know Phil quite well don't you! :lol::rofl::lol:;):P