Mike,
as usual, I owe you an apology because...damnit! you are right yet
again
The set isn't as good as my best result.
That was way back in Feb 2009 when I didn't use cooling on the DSI
and I didn't have the better PE gear made
I simply had better focus, more frames and better seeing.
That set was 219 fr x 5 sec = 18mins exposure.
This set was 34 fr x 20 sec = 11 mins exposure. (I was incorrect earlier
stating 65fr)
When I throw my better deconvolve routine and 1.6x resample routine at
the older set I get this (below)
And wouldn't you know it....you even suggested the same thing to
me two years ago about resolution.
http://www.iceinspace.com.au/forum/s...51&postcount=7
Sorry Mike....ya big teddy bear
(hugs)
Steve
Quote:
Originally Posted by strongmanmike
Hi Steve
I wasn't questioning your PE, I just think the photo looks a little out of focus, that's all. It's close but given you said it was good seeing, a 12" 1500mm FL Newt should give better res than that, that's all.
A good test is that there is a faint double star just to the right of the main dust lane that should be at least indetifiable as a double (figure 8 shapped) if you have good resolution and clearly seperated if you have excellent resolution (Like say, when using an AO device on a longer FL 12.5" RC in good seeing).
The love refered to was a man love of course 
Mike |