NGC 253 galaxy

[hotspur (Chris)]

Had a go last night at trying to get an image of this lovely object.

The guiding was still not as good as I would have like,there was a fair bit of smoke around yesterday and heat haze-the stars seemed to be 'twinklling',not sure if such conditions affect guiding.Bit I wanted to make an attempt while no moon about.

I used 6 subs and 5 darks at 4 min each,I used DSS and then CS5 adjustments.

I had difficulty in getting images into DSS,I converted them all to tiffs,but nothing appeared,I had to do a bit of jiggling to load the RAWs in.eventually managed something.

Anyhow here is my attempt,feed back welcomed-thanks for looking,Chris

[Ross G]

Hi Chris,

Pretty good detail for 24 min of exposure.

The condition of the seeing has such a big influence on the autoguiding.

Did you load the Canon raw files straight into DSS or did you convert them to tiffs first?

Looks good.

Ross

[hotspur (Chris)]

Thank you Ross for feed back.

I had the images,took them into canon DPP,could not figure how to change them to tiffs in there.took them into cs5 changed them into tiffs.opened DSS and tried to open pictures using tiffs-no go.So tried the raws,had to change something in a tab,took awhile but got them in.

I tried M45 a few nights ago,was happy with guiding,after 12.30 am the seeing got better,and I could noticed the images get clearer-the guiding was good.So maybe (hopefully) its just the seeing.The focus on this 253 is a little out-operater error (I did'nt check it)

Cheers Chris

[jjjnettie (Jeanette)]

It's a beaut galaxy. Thanks for the view.

[Alchemy (Clive)]

I see you be extended to 4 min subs, stars are almost round there's no obvious errors there, you would get that much out of round due to slight polar error or even a bit of ordinary seeing.

Surprised you couldn't load Tiff files into deepskystacker, although I wonder at cs5 ability to accurately convert the RAW files.

Satisfying to capture yourself things that others are doing. You're in the big league now.

[hotspur (Chris)]

Originally Posted by Alchemy

I see you be extended to 4 min subs, stars are almost round there's no obvious errors there, you would get that much out of round due to slight polar error or even a bit of ordinary seeing.

Surprised you couldn't load Tiff files into deepskystacker, although I wonder at cs5 ability to accurately convert the RAW files.

Satisfying to capture yourself things that others are doing. You're in the big league now.

Thanks for feed back Clive and jjj,good to get some feed back of the top IIS imagers-so may be I have been getting a bit too nit picky,on myself.Its good to see this makes the 'pass' grade with the elite here.

I felt the seeing was not the best last night-certainly not as good as when I collected data for M45,which I was happy with.Also this is slightly out of focus-which also would show up any egging a little more.?

Will give it a break for awhile-but still will try barlow in guider-making 400 FL-which is very highly regarded F.L for imagers.

Cheers Chris

[hotspur (Chris)]

Originally Posted by Alchemy

I see you be extended to 4 min subs, stars are almost round there's no obvious errors there, you would get that much out of round due to slight polar error or even a bit of ordinary seeing.

Surprised you couldn't load Tiff files into deepskystacker, although I wonder at cs5 ability to accurately convert the RAW files.

Satisfying to capture yourself things that others are doing. You're in the big league now.

BTW yes Clive I agree I'd much prefer DPP than cs5,but I just could not get them to load in to DSS,(gooing to bed at 1 am and getting up at 5 am to PP,does not help) so will try another time.Its just good to get some feed back-re data is not so bad after all.