Log in

View Full Version here: : New scope, new shot (part 2)


bratislav
10-02-2018, 12:55 PM
Complete coincidence, scouts word ;)
Another scope about to get into operation, unlike Louie's "quick and easy" go in with a wad of cash, walk out with goodies, assemble together using IKEA tools and shoot, mine being homemade never really is finished :screwy:
But, after many nights of testing and fiddling around, it is finished enough for a proper test shot. What else than a faint nebula in Carina, which is now well placed and it can be imaged with necessary narrowband filters from my deep orange zone in Melbourne.
12" f/4 homemade Newtonian (with a tiny 80mm secondary), ZWO ASI 1600MM camera, Losmandy Titan. 45min total exposure.

Selected areas at 100%. Seeing was decent (around 1.8-2 arc seconds), helped with active mirror cooling. Can't wait for a night of good seeing!

Atmos
10-02-2018, 01:00 PM
Your stars look nice across the field which is what we all want so your fiddling has paid off :)

Looking at the crops, it appears that you’ve lost a lot of detail either in the noise reduction or in the dynamic range compression... or a bit of both.

bratislav
10-02-2018, 01:04 PM
Can you point at detail that is lost? You have to remember, this combination is 0.57 arc seconds per pixel, it is never going to look very sharp at 100% unless scope is placed in space ... or in Atacama.

atalas
10-02-2018, 01:09 PM
Bratislav,the scope looks like It's performing nicely with good resolution but, It's really hard to evaluate how well with the amount of deconvolution used:question:

Can you put up some new pics with no Decon ?

bratislav
10-02-2018, 01:17 PM
There's not that much deconvolution really.
Here's just a straight stack, with levels adjust only.

bratislav
10-02-2018, 01:38 PM
And a single 60s sub ...

(those ZWO 1600's have really low readout noise ;) )

atalas
10-02-2018, 01:40 PM
Excellent!thank you....now I can say for sure that you've done a great job !

Now,on what Col mentioned about detail?sometimes It is just plain obvious that detail has been smeared and distorted....like is the case in the first pics you put up.

By referencing back to your linear stretch image as you process on, you can keep an eye out on not distorting structures.

Hope you get what I'm saying....I'm not great at explaining what's in my alternate universe mind :lol:

Oh,and by the way anything 2" and under is actually terrific seeing rarely comes around my parts of the woods.

Atmos
10-02-2018, 01:40 PM
When you compare the processes images against the complex stretch you can see the mottling and clumping caused by noise reduction. The simple stretch is a far superior rendition.
You have some wonderful data to play with :thumbsup:

bratislav
10-02-2018, 02:04 PM
Fair enough! I've just used a default noise reduction in StarTools and didn't play much at all with settings (data was collected last night). Maybe I need more sleep ...

bratislav
10-02-2018, 02:21 PM
Do you control your primary's temperature? You'd be surprised how things improve once you do. Fans are now mandatory in all my mirrored scopes.

atalas
10-02-2018, 03:10 PM
Yes of cause....huge difference in star profile when fans are running.

RickS
11-02-2018, 01:25 PM
The single sub looks excellent!

multiweb
11-02-2018, 04:27 PM
+1 Single sub really shows the optics quality. :thumbsup: You had lost a lot of fine details in the noise reduction with the original.

bratislav
11-02-2018, 05:25 PM
After not so much sleep (we had a wedding party to attend, I nearly forgot), I finally sat down and redid the processing, this time with absolutely minimal noise reduction and other sauces. So much in fact that now other problems are visible :sadeyes:
I knew 1600 can suffer from fixed pattern noise, but I haven't seen any evidence of it; until now that is. The fix is actually quite simple - dither the subs religiously. Note to oneself. (I have actually specified the dither in SGP but realized the next day I forgot to enable it in the profile :mad2:)

So this is now a take #2, definitely not a final one, but I think despite the remaining noise it looks better. Of course this needs more subs, better seeing, proper dither, proper flats, but it is a test image after all ...

multiweb
11-02-2018, 05:26 PM
Now that looks very good indeed. :thumbsup::thumbsup::thumbsup:

Atmos
11-02-2018, 05:46 PM
That is looking 1000% better!!
Very nice detail, very sharp.

bratislav
11-02-2018, 05:50 PM
Thanks guys!
I knew that optics is capable of very high resolution (both primary and secondary have been interferometrically tested to insanely high Strehl numbers). But having good optics is only a part of the story ...

Paul Haese
11-02-2018, 09:30 PM
The later processing looks great. Very nice detail. Contrast levels are good too.

strongmanmike
11-02-2018, 10:49 PM
The latest lot look great Bratislav, nice :thumbsup:

Quality of processing is inversely proportional to the square of ones level of attention, sleep deprivation... and inebriation :drink: :P

Mike

LewisM
11-02-2018, 10:51 PM
Oh, so you process drunk Mike? :scared3:

strongmanmike
11-02-2018, 11:09 PM
...o-cc-ass-ionally :whistle: quality of singing has a similar proportionality...

LewisM
11-02-2018, 11:29 PM
I process with my eyes closed and both hands tied behind my back - I get better results.

I hope you are imaging tonight - pretty darned nice out there, and chilling down too.

strongmanmike
11-02-2018, 11:44 PM
Nah, going to bed now, sitting week at the Leg Assembly coming up, gotta be cognisant for the Pollies :)

LewisM
12-02-2018, 12:06 AM
Leg Assembly... I thought they were all bums :lol: