A very wide field view of these objects. The attraction of doing wide field gives a more complete picture of some of the gas clouds in our galaxy. Personally, I am not sure about the colour. It looks quite pushed to the red end of the spectrum to me. Maybe it is the smoke that has caused this slant.
A very wide field view of these objects. The attraction of doing wide field gives a more complete picture of some of the gas clouds in our galaxy. Personally, I am not sure about the colour. It looks quite pushed to the red end of the spectrum to me. Maybe it is the smoke that has caused this slant.
Thanks for the feedback Paul. Yes on 2nd look it is a bit red biased. I corrected this and reposted it to the same link. This was taken a while ago and there was no smoke then.
Hmmm? Looks a little harsh and red to me Greg with slightly blown and flattened highlights The FOV is great though As I have said before, I would love to try one of those Pentax lenses one day
Hmmm? Looks a little harsh and red to me Greg with slightly blown and flattened highlights The FOV is great though As I have said before, I would love to try one of those Pentax lenses one day
Mike
Thanks for the feedback Mike. I looked at it again and redid it from very early steps onwards. This time the Ha blend went much better and I got the RGB combine to come up nicer than before. It wasn't going together the way I wanted it to the first time. I am happy with this version.
Yes the Pentax lens is quite nice and has double ED lenses.
Thanks Tim. Its good to image from "different genres" so to speak.
I enjoy the various types of astro images. I haven't done much planetary so that is on the wishlist at some point.
Very nice Greg, I've done this as a 2 panel mosaic in the past but as it was done with an unmoved Nikon DSLR, it didn't so anywhere near the same extent of Ha as what you've captured here.
You've done a lot of jumping between longer focal lengths and nightscapes so 300mm is a middle ground
Very nice Greg, I've done this as a 2 panel mosaic in the past but as it was done with an unmoved Nikon DSLR, it didn't so anywhere near the same extent of Ha as what you've captured here.
You've done a lot of jumping between longer focal lengths and nightscapes so 300mm is a middle ground
Thanks Colin. Yes I am quite fond of doing nightscapes. They fill a night whilst waiting for the main scope to do its imaging run.
I managed to get Starnet++ working using Pixinsight (the easiest way).
Here is a starless version. Its not bad and even though I have only used the program a few times I can see its going to work better on some images that others.
At a guess its going to work on images that are long exposures and that have a predominance of nebula in the frame.
The program can leave dark spots behind where some stars were. It does though make the image more like an impressionist artists painting.
Huh! well looki that while I don't like it as an astroimage, as such, I do like it as a cool bit of art, reminds me of a stained sandstone wall. If printed, it could look really good on the right wall, or even in a garden landscape
Huh! well looki that while I don't like it as an astroimage, as such, I do like it as a cool bit of art, reminds me of a stained sandstone wall. If printed, it could look really good on the right wall, or even in a garden landscape
Mike
Yes I think that sums it up as well. Its a tool that may have some use but it does create a cool effect if you don't look too closely!
Lucky I have Pixinsight as the Windows version is hard to understand.
The FOV is great though 
As I have said before, I would love to try one of those Pentax lenses one day 
