More B&W globs

[Peter Ward]

The lower noise and extra QE of the KAF16803 sensor is proving troublesome for twilight flats....with light levels dark enough to not saturate the sensor, stars are popping into view, making sky-flats a bit of a challenge.

Omega Cent is upon us...so I figured, why not...

http://www.atscope.com.au/BRO/gallery50.html

Added a touch of LR de-convolve....

The lack of filters (hence colour) is driving me spare...but the new CCD shows much promise :D

[Octane]

Resolved, right to the core. Wow!

Can't wait to see this as a completed LRGB.

H

[Peter Ward]

Thanks H ! .... self guide, like "Sellys", simply works.....as you will soon discover :D

[DavidU]

Tight as ! Core looks fab.

[leon]

Gee Peter that is awesome mate, pin points right to the middle fantastic work.

Leon

[Peter Ward]

Ta..... tight as?? you mean a fishy's ... ??? :)



Thanks Leon...given the size of this monster sensor...which still gives me some concerns, thankfully the edges aren't too shabby either

[Doomsayer]

Certainly a spectacular view. Your website lists it as 5189 instead of 5139 (A minor detail). I have some 50x50mm baaders not being used at the moment if you get really desperate.

guy

[multiweb]

oooh...very nice. can't wait to see that one in colour. :thumbsup:

[Peter Ward]

Thanks Guy... sadly the 50mm's are too small...& the typo is now fixed!

[Peter Ward]

Colour?! ...yep..that would be nice :sadeyes:

[DavidU]

When do you expect the filters?

[Bassnut]

Excellent of course, but getting picky, theres slightly woofy guideing (I bet you took this in a hurry, in frustration ;-), and slight vignetting in the corners. I dont think you have an RCOS corrector, do you think one is required with the KAF16803 on your RCOS ? (not that its obvious without zooming).

[Garyh]

Pinpoint sharp Peter! Get that RCOS cookin!

[AlexN]

This is going to make a seriously kick arse luminance for some colour data Peter... Looks like a pretty unreal setup..

As Fred mentioned, I'd imagine the 4" RCOS flattener is required for the 16803..(although I'm not overly sure if the 14.25" supports it, or if that requires the upgrade to the 16" RCOS..?) As you are most certainly aware - she's a BIG sensor...

Do you have any ideas when you'll have filters? or when STX-AO will be available.... Normally I would have thought with the FL of the RCOS and the relatively small pixels of the 16803 that AO would be required for really really sharp stars, seems I would have been wrong.... :)

Despite the B&W, you're producing some really really nice images with the camera already..

Awaiting some technicolor action! :D (as I'm quite sure you are too!! :D)

[Peter Ward]

Dam your macro zooms Fred! :)

The guiding was fine...but my polar alignment is out and there was a constant Dec drift (due having to re-set the PME due fried electronics from some time back).

However I do use a RCOS FFC...(still getting the spacing sorted with the STX). Sorry, no vignetting I could see after the flats were applied :)

[strongmanmike]

That's a very nice lum shot Peter, it has a very glowing sparkly look :thumbsup:.

Now..and only because you made reference to the Sellys self guide :rolleyes: :lol:..I have to concure with Fred :question: there is never the less something going on with the stars..? Normally this would be just nit picking and the imager would be well aware of it and I wouldn't bother mentioning it, so I am sorry if it sounds like this but given the gear and it's housing...weeelllll....more expectation for perfection I guess?

Still a better than average and appealing image of course.

Mike

[marc4darkskies]

Looks damn fine to me Peter (except for some field curvature (?) ... which is particularly noticeable when you zoom in to 400% :))

Cheers, Marcus

[Peter Ward]

Ah...true perfection is a myth....the are only degrees of perfection Grasshopper :)

[Peter Ward]

Thanks Marcus! ...Quite possibly the FFC position needs refinement....I just love how my images get put under the microscope :lol:

[strongmanmike]

Oi who you callin a grasshopper?...I'm more of a locust ;)

[strongmanmike]

Yeh... know how you feel :rolleyes: Fred likes to use an electron microscope and a micrometer :lol:

[AlexN]

There there big fellas.. :) Try being colour blind and tell me how you like people telling you whats what :)

[sjastro]

I don't understand why images should get the "electron microscope treatment".

When I used to post on the SBIG forum some of the US imagers had the irratating habit of performing autopsies on my images revealing every subtle defect that would not be observed under ordinary conditions.

What's the point of it?

Steven

[Octane]

To make their e-peen bigger than yours, Steven.

H

[AlexN]

Generally - I'd say its a case of "your gear is better than mine... Bet I can find faults in it though!" However in other cases it is "We all know you can do better... What happened?"

Some times I'm sure its just to get up the persons nose...

I think it can be constructive at times.. It may be such a subtle defect that you yourself don't notice it until someone points it out.. and whilst at face value, that is annoying, once that tiny defect is sorted out, be it via processing or slight hardware changes, isn't it then satisfying to know that the problem is gone??

If you have to zoom to 400% to notice problems, the problem does not need to be worried about. If it can be clearly seen at 100% then you should endeavor to fix it when time/money allows... Thats my policy on it anyway...

[sjastro]

Without naming names, one of the astroimagers has produced world class monochrome images but considers most image processing as fraudulent which destroys the ethics of astroimaging.

Looking for faults in an image rather than the image itself seems to be the major objective with some people.

Steven

[Octane]

Steven, you should see some "photography" forums -- full of gearheads who can rattle off every last minute detail on a piece of equipment used to take a posted image, but, wouldn't know how to take an image, or, know a good one if it upped and bit them on the ass.

H

[AlexN]

Humi, Brisbane photography forums are 99% as you just described. for this reason, I am a VERY silent member of those forums... I used to post images there... Now, every time I post it turns into a canon vs nikon argument, or whether I should have paid the extra money for the 600 L over the 500 L etc.. Sometimes you have to step back and just say "who cares" when it comes to stuff like that...

[Peter Ward]

There, there guys....I'll be the first to admit the image is not perfect ...but it's not too shabby either (IMHO) given the size of a KAF16803 sensor.

Frankly, most systems would fail miserably in off axis performance and mounting such a large CCD assembly...to be sure, these systems are not for the casual imager.

Would a RCOS 82mm field corrector make a difference? I doubt it (gosh...I sound like Kevin '07) :)

The KAF16803 sensor has "only" a 54 mm diagonal....ie 4mm larger than standard 2" systems. Yet it is easily covered by the 70mm back-end of the RCOS system I currently use.....and given it would require $US6,000 worth of new back-end gear to go to 82mm....nah....a little tweaking in FFC spacing, and polar alignment seems like a better option until proved otherwise ;)