Quote:
Originally Posted by troypiggo
You may have been out of it for a while, but you bring new and interesting targets. Thanks for getting back into it.
I know the feeling (2 young ones taking time away from hobbies)
|
Thanks Troy.
Yes, young ones tend to do that I'm discovering. Wife is already planning number 2, so if that happens we may end up with 2 under 2. Scary. Its a good thing of course...but really other than the equipment troubles I don't have an excuse not to be producing astro images. Its not as though I need to set the equipment up each night, or even physically open the observatory for that matter. Its all done remotely so am hoping family time is maintained.
Its good to see some new targets now and then thats for sure. I think once you get a new bit of gear its always interesting to hit the usual targets for comparison from previous equipment results but I normally take the approach that once you've hit a target, its time to move on to something else. There are so many targets and not enough time.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Paul Haese
Nice image Jase. I had wondered why I had not seen anything on FB from you lately. Don't you just love bug hunting of equipment? I am still trying to resolve the field flattening on the RC12. I feel your pain. What is the problem with the camera?
|
Cheers Paul. Equipment woes have been painful. I've gone through two ccd cameras with this set up so far. Unfortunately my F16M will not work with this optical train as the Wynne corrector spacing requirements don't allow it with an OAG in the path. Bug hunting is time consuming. A lot of trial and error. Similar to you, I will need to hunt down field flattening but will not do so until the original camera is returned. The camera had a digitisation error where a certain range of pixels values were incorrectly presented. It produced a noise like appearance around the stars and the extended object when values hit the specific range. It couldn't be corrected with dithering as the spread was too large. Hopefully not too long now given support have had it for seven weeks. Thanks again.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Peter Ward
My only observation would be it looks a little soft.
A great rendering of a tough target just the same.  |
Fair call Peter. I may need to refocus more often at this speed. Will look into it. The image is au naturel with no sharpening applied. Neb details are all from Ha data. Unsharp mask would have probably made the image snap if applied lightly. Thanks for the feedback. No repro, time to move on.