Attachment 248114The Swan has always been one of my (many) Favourites o here's my dilemma. I used a UHC filter thinking that it would enhance the Nebulosity ( which the physics says it does) however the old problem of the colour balance skew appears.Here are 2 options that I have post-processed in Gimp (probably different work flows) . At this point in time I think the mono version is the best 245 lights . I also used the 'Best percentage " in DSS which used 188 lights instead of total of 245 which reduced star bloom .. I suspect I need to get some unfiltered RGB data to add???? All shot at 3.2 Sec at ISO3200.
Last edited by Zubenel; 18-08-2019 at 01:50 PM.
Reason: Additional image
Hi Wes, I think the UHC filter might be hurting your image of M17 perhaps. I'm no expert on filters mind you, the only filter I use is a Baader IR/UV cut, to minimise star bloat on my OSC.
As I mentioned in reply to your comment on M17 thread, casstony is getting excellent results with the L-enhace filter, have a look at his M17 just down the page a bit.
Cheers,
Tony
Hi Wes..you did good...short exposures are not bad eh.
I use filters for the zwo rbghaos but sadly my experience using a filter on my DSLR left me feeling that I did not get my money's worth.
Anyways I recon more subs is always the answer so , as you have done, you can build a bank of really good data...I would set the upper limit on subs by what can your computer manage...also I don't know if you have tried a drizzle...so far it seems to improve my stuff and despite efforts to educate me here I am still not understanding if anything I am doing is useful...but it's a great excuse to reprocess old data.
Great effort..look at all you did right is the key and enjoy your results.
Alex
Obviously your main challenge is exposure length Wes, though you've still managed to get a nice looking Swan.
The small, bright planetary nebulae would be great targets for your gear; they're too small with the scopes I'm using but big apertures and short exposures should work well. I noticed the Bug nebula in one of my recent images but it's tiny - it's well placed at the moment.
Tony. I’ve been working with Gary Myers from Stellacat and Peter Read from SDM telescopes to improve the Tracking of Zamar . Understanding the procedures and protocols associated with the union of hardware and software has been time heavey , difficult ( to my mined) at times and frustrating.
The goal is be able to increase an exposure from around 3.2 seconds to 10-20seconds. Currently an object drifts off the ccd chip within 30 minutes which means that each exposure on average will make the stars elongate . The short exposure time also limits the Star magnitude. However , I was successful last night in downloading new and corrected gearing Ratios into the servocat. As a test I centred on NGC 6804 PN in Aquila , turned on local sync , made sure the ladder was out of the track path and went inside . 2 hrs and 10 min later through the 12mm Nagler(30 arc min fov)yielding 211 x mag the PN was with in a few acr minutes of centre field I’m hoping this will take my images to the next level and give me a chance at fainter galaxies .#killstarbloat
Hi Tony, I’ve determined my tracking errors and Uploaded to the servocat computer. There is still work to do however I have now been able to get a high percentage of subs at 6 whole seconds . I used M57 last Friday night and am pretty happy with the outcome which is almost double what I had been doing . The ultimate rig would be a tracking EQ platform $$ M57 pic to come .
As we say , as long as we are enjoying the journey keep on 😊.
Hi Tony, I’ve determined my tracking errors and Uploaded to the servocat computer. There is still work to do however I have now been able to get a high percentage of subs at 6 whole seconds . I used M57 last Friday night and am pretty happy with the outcome which is almost double what I had been doing . The ultimate rig would be a tracking EQ platform $$ M57 pic to come .
As we say , as long as we are enjoying the journey keep on 😊.
I'm curious to see your results Wes. I've got a C11 and you've got me wondering if I could use it for the brightest planetary neb's with very short exposures.
Out of interest, which UHC filter are you using ? I was using a CLS for a while and had star bloat issues until I switched to a CLS CCD. The CCD version has an UV/IR cut as opposed to the standard CLS used for visual. It makes a huge difference.
Hey Ryan, I’m using what I have which is the Astronomik UHC that I’ve used for visual for many years now. My camera isn’t astro modified so would a UV/IR cut filter be beneficial ? Cheers
Hey Ryan, I’m using what I have which is the Astronomik UHC that I’ve used for visual for many years now. My camera isn’t astro modified so would a UV/IR cut filter be beneficial ? Cheers
In theory you’re 100% right. The stock filters in your camera should take care of the I/R and U/V. I guess, without seeing the exact transmission lines of those filters it’s up for debate as to how well they work given they were designed for terrestrial photography where most of the light they are designed to cut out isn’t direct light ie. Looking at our star ? All I can use is my experience. I did use the two different filters on my unmodded 350d before I got my modified version and I found that the imaging filter did significantly reduce star bloat.
You are aware that my rig is Az/Alt unguided so tracking is my greatest issue with a proportion of the subs being completely useless due to tracking error E.g Lines ,figure 8's etc. for stars . I've recently stopped going through the subs manually as this can take literally hours and I feel that the software in DSS or Sequator is doing a much better job. So up to now my tracking would have well and truly consumed star bloat .Thanks for the advice . Hopefully with the refining of my tracking I will get to the stage where I can then consider star bloat as problem to tackle. https://www.astroshop.eu/uhc-filters...uhc-2-/p,16766
You are aware that my rig is Az/Alt unguided so tracking is my greatest issue with a proportion of the subs being completely useless due to tracking error E.g Lines ,figure 8's etc. for stars . I've recently stopped going through the subs manually as this can take literally hours and I feel that the software in DSS or Sequator is doing a much better job. So up to now my tracking would have well and truly consumed star bloat .Thanks for the advice . Hopefully with the refining of my tracking I will get to the stage where I can then consider star bloat as problem to tackle. https://www.astroshop.eu/uhc-filters...uhc-2-/p,16766
Yeah, I read the thread. I started on an Alt-az unguided too so I feel your pain with manually going through and deleting an obscene amount of subs because of star issues. The comments on the filter re: star bloom we’re just the part I thought I might be able to offer advice. Keep at it ! You’re doing great
I'm curious to see your results Wes. I've got a C11 and you've got me wondering if I could use it for the brightest planetary neb's with very short exposures.
Hey Tony ,
Surface brightness is the key I believe I've done some not so "bright PN's since and my set up is still giving , in my estimation , a reasonable result. Faint low brightness Galaxies not so much . As long as you get enough stars to stack. I have been upping the ISO as there were a few times it just wouldn't and I had to can the data. Cheers
. I used M57 last Friday night and am pretty happy with the outcome 
M57 pic to come . 
