etill
26-12-2019, 06:11 PM
Looks like the Carina Nebula was popular in Melbourne recently..
I was trying to get my alignment and tracking worked out as I'm pretty new to this and was trialing how long an exposure I could get at various points in the sky unguided (the answer is about 60 seconds at the moment, I need more practice).
I noticed when I took a quick look at this one that I could actually make out some nice details so I set it up in APT to take a few more exposures while I went inside to read up on how to take bias and dark frames.
Vixen R200 on a CGEM mount, unguided
Unmodified Canon 60D with a Baader coma corrector
30 x 60 secs ISO 400 (sensor temp was 24c mostly)
20 darks, flats and bias (SuperBias with PixInsight), my flats are pretty terrible I think since I had to go back out the next morning to do them and it was my first attempt.
I've tried a few processing tools with some beginners tutorials and by far the best result is from pixinsight, but it also seems to have the biggest learning curve. I think I'll probably end up buying that one if i can get some better imaging done within the trial period even though is way more than nebulosity and startools (I use a mac, so they seem like my other options).
I went through so many tutorials I'm not even sure what I did with the processing workflow in the end on this one, but I am pretty sure it was:
Calibrated and integrated
Dynamic background extraction
Photometric colour calibration (that process is super cool)
HDR multiscale transform
I used the auto-stretch with the screen transfer function because I couldn't seem to do better manually
Curves transformation
I have some questions after this first attempt though.
Is the lack of detail extending out from the core due to the unmodified camera, or short exposures, or both? I have seen much more detail on astrobin, but with much wider field of view too, so that also maybe it.
Does the coma correction look ok? I got it with the scope from another forum member here and since it was already set up for a canon I used it as is and it looks good to me.
With a properly aligned and levelled CGEM what length of exposure should I be able to get without guiding before things get elongated? I have a guidescope and camera but I'm working up to that trying to get the basics right first. I'm pretty sure my level is off as its quite good in some parts of the sky and much worse elsewhere, plus I've plate solved the crap out it and the polar alignment when I first start out at the home position is very close to the pole (after several adjustments). I use DARV after that and get good straight lines with 1 minute exposure mostly, but then pointed elsewhere they are off again.
Any other comments / suggestions also welcome.
I was trying to get my alignment and tracking worked out as I'm pretty new to this and was trialing how long an exposure I could get at various points in the sky unguided (the answer is about 60 seconds at the moment, I need more practice).
I noticed when I took a quick look at this one that I could actually make out some nice details so I set it up in APT to take a few more exposures while I went inside to read up on how to take bias and dark frames.
Vixen R200 on a CGEM mount, unguided
Unmodified Canon 60D with a Baader coma corrector
30 x 60 secs ISO 400 (sensor temp was 24c mostly)
20 darks, flats and bias (SuperBias with PixInsight), my flats are pretty terrible I think since I had to go back out the next morning to do them and it was my first attempt.
I've tried a few processing tools with some beginners tutorials and by far the best result is from pixinsight, but it also seems to have the biggest learning curve. I think I'll probably end up buying that one if i can get some better imaging done within the trial period even though is way more than nebulosity and startools (I use a mac, so they seem like my other options).
I went through so many tutorials I'm not even sure what I did with the processing workflow in the end on this one, but I am pretty sure it was:
Calibrated and integrated
Dynamic background extraction
Photometric colour calibration (that process is super cool)
HDR multiscale transform
I used the auto-stretch with the screen transfer function because I couldn't seem to do better manually
Curves transformation
I have some questions after this first attempt though.
Is the lack of detail extending out from the core due to the unmodified camera, or short exposures, or both? I have seen much more detail on astrobin, but with much wider field of view too, so that also maybe it.
Does the coma correction look ok? I got it with the scope from another forum member here and since it was already set up for a canon I used it as is and it looks good to me.
With a properly aligned and levelled CGEM what length of exposure should I be able to get without guiding before things get elongated? I have a guidescope and camera but I'm working up to that trying to get the basics right first. I'm pretty sure my level is off as its quite good in some parts of the sky and much worse elsewhere, plus I've plate solved the crap out it and the polar alignment when I first start out at the home position is very close to the pole (after several adjustments). I use DARV after that and get good straight lines with 1 minute exposure mostly, but then pointed elsewhere they are off again.
Any other comments / suggestions also welcome.