I've been trying to process my Orion Nebula images using DSS & then processing in Afinity Photo (very similar in capability to Photoshop without the hefty price tag).
I have to admit, I have no idea what I am doing & I'm struggling to achieve any sort of result that is better than the original single shot straight out of the camera..
Attached is (1st pic) the low res cropped image from the camera & (2nd pic) the cropped result from DSS, I think it is about 17 images stacked...
When I try to then process in Affinity to bring out the nebulosity, it just gets very grainy & I struggle to get any colour adjustment, I haven't saved any of them because to be honest, they look like rubbish. I do understand that they were shot at ISO 6400 which introduces a lot of noise & grain.. it was my first attempt... I will be dialing back the ISO (when the rain stops.... one day)
My first question is about the result out of DSS, is this what I should expect?
I will have more questions to follow.. apart from having no clue about how to use the various programs I have effectively, I have no frame of reference on what I should or shouldn't be able to achieve with the data I have. I know it won't ever be as tight as some on here, I'm using an SCT on an alt/az mount...
Anyways.. hoping someone might be able to guide me along the way...
Try star tools for processing, it's free to use. The only downfall is you can't save the image, I used it quite a few times before I bought it to be sure. But what you can do is take a screen shot with your laptop ( snip it i think it's called on windows ). https://astro.ecuadors.net/processin...ith-startools/
I started by using the work flow described in the link pretty much how it is written there, not sure if my original shots are still here.
Did you use dark shots as well?
I'm on my mobile and can't fully remember my settings for DSS atm, the settings now are working really well.
Dont forget to use one shot as a reference frame for DSS as it'll use that as a basis for the rest of the subs.
When I get onto my lappy I'll give ya more info.
Cheers
Karl
Your first shot with the colour is actually pretty good for your equipment imo. Sure it could improve with a lot of experience and detailed work but without an EQ Mount it’s going to be a long slow road for any really noticeable improvement.
Sorry I don’t mean to discourage. You should definitely keep working at it in the meantime because you will learn as you go regardless of what gear you’re using. The first image is very good all things considered. But I would definitely invest in an EQ Mount if your wanting to image DSO’s.
This was as far as I got with a alt az:
The lagoon triffid is my first ever photo on an EQ Mount taken a month later.
I jumped onto my laptop as I was curious at what settings I had. I didn't take snips of flats or bias as both are the same as the darks.
I used to just use the standard settings that DSS had when I first opened but after some reading I changed all the settings and I've seen an improvement in the final process.
Most of my images come out of DSS like your second picture, one I did on NGC 6188 there was nothing on the screen except for 2 stars but after processing.
The best advice I can give you is to keep it simple and concentrate on one thing at a time. AP is not easy !
ISO 6400 will be grainy/noisy. Nothing you do in DSS will change that.
The image that DSS pumps out will tend to be very dark and grey ( lacking in colour ). This is normal. Then you move to processing the image. You'll find that when you open the image in your processing software, it will already be lighter.
Let's get back to your original data though. As has been discussed in your previous thread, use a bahtinov mask for focus. Secondly and probably more appropriate to this thread is the quality of the initial image. The only way you will be able to initially decrease initial noise is to get your ISO down. Every camera has a point of invariance. You can google that but the simple explanation is the most effective ISO balancing brightness verses noise. ( it's more complex than that but that's keeping it simple ) The compromise to reducing ISO is you aren't getting enough data which means you need to increase the length of your subs. Only way to do that on your Alt-az mount is to make a wedge to take care of feild rotation. Unfortunely, as you're finding, it all has a cascading effect. One thing effects another and so on.
17 subs, you will soon come to realise, is not nearly enough to deal with signal to noise ratio. All cameras are noisy in low light. Obviously some more than others and dedicated cooled AP cameras less than the others. The idea of stacking is to increase the signal to noise ratio. More subs is the simple key here.
You say in your thread title that you're struggling...... We all did / are. We are all here to help though. Lean on us and use us for help as much as you like. What you are already doing is far more than a lot of people ever do and that includes professional photographers. Most don't even attempt it because it's hard so give yourself a pat on the back for what you have already done. Also don't forget that what you have already taken a photo of is 1,300 light years away !
Your first shot with the colour is actually pretty good for your equipment imo. Sure it could improve with a lot of experience and detailed work but without an EQ Mount it’s going to be a long slow road for any really noticeable improvement.
Sorry I don’t mean to discourage. You should definitely keep working at it in the meantime because you will learn as you go regardless of what gear you’re using. The first image is very good all things considered. But I would definitely invest in an EQ Mount if your wanting to image DSO’s.
This was as far as I got with a alt az:
The lagoon triffid is my first ever photo on an EQ Mount taken a month later.
I have also just taken the step to an EQ mount and I'm not going to lie, it's a great step up although I'm not used to it yet. Having said that, this is my Orion on an alt-az mount with a small SCT . By far not the best you'll see but an idea of what can be done.
This is exactly what I was after; I now have some points of reference to look at & compare with what I am achieving (or not). All of the advice & commentary below does spur me on.. just gotta fiddle some more & not be so impatient... Plus as many of you have noted... lower ISO, balance of exposure vs field rotation all equals better data & need to capture more subs then experiment more & more with rendering. Cheers to you all...
Some individual responses are below each quoted comment:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Karlzburg
Try star tools for processing, it's free to use. The only downfall is you can't save the image, I used it quite a few times before I bought it to be sure. But what you can do is take a screen shot with your laptop ( snip it i think it's called on windows ). https://astro.ecuadors.net/processin...ith-startools/
I started by using the work flow described in the link pretty much how it is written there, not sure if my original shots are still here.
Did you use dark shots as well?
I'm on my mobile and can't fully remember my settings for DSS atm, the settings now are working really well.
Dont forget to use one shot as a reference frame for DSS as it'll use that as a basis for the rest of the subs.
When I get onto my lappy I'll give ya more info.
Cheers
Karl
Any Q's dont hesitate to ask or pm 👍🏼
Thanks Karl, I had been wondering if Startools or Nebulosity might be the way to go.. I will have a look at the free version of star tools to see what how it goes for me & will look closely at the link you provided to work flow. Not entirely sure how to use one shot as a reference in DSS but, will look at that more closely in the coming days
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gavin1234
Your first shot with the colour is actually pretty good for your equipment imo. Sure it could improve with a lot of experience and detailed work but without an EQ Mount it’s going to be a long slow road for any really noticeable improvement.
Sorry I don’t mean to discourage. You should definitely keep working at it in the meantime because you will learn as you go regardless of what gear you’re using. The first image is very good all things considered. But I would definitely invest in an EQ Mount if your wanting to image DSO’s.
This was as far as I got with a alt az:
The lagoon triffid is my first ever photo on an EQ Mount taken a month later.
Thanks Gavin, no discouragement there... again, having a point of reference as to what I might actually achieve with current setup is invaluable. EQ Mount might happen at some point or at least, I might have a crack at a DIY wedge.. challenges ahead on either of those...
Quote:
Originally Posted by Karlzburg
I jumped onto my laptop as I was curious at what settings I had. I didn't take snips of flats or bias as both are the same as the darks.
I used to just use the standard settings that DSS had when I first opened but after some reading I changed all the settings and I've seen an improvement in the final process.
Most of my images come out of DSS like your second picture, one I did on NGC 6188 there was nothing on the screen except for 2 stars but after processing.
Here's an 80 sec shot I did with a Mak Cas f/11.8 on an Alt-Az mount, don't give up Carlton.
I took some darks tonight but, as I tried to use them realised they had to be at the same settings as the original shots.. I will fix that later & try again with DSS as well as looking into that 'reference frame' concept.. I have started to play around with the DSS settings; it did improve things but, still seemed to lose any nebulosity in the stacked image. The post processing brings it back out but, noisy as.. a factor of ISO...
How the hell did you get an 80 second sub on an Alt Az? Or is that the integrated time from many subs?
Quote:
Originally Posted by RyanJones
Hi Carlton,
The best advice I can give you is to keep it simple and concentrate on one thing at a time. AP is not easy !
ISO 6400 will be grainy/noisy. Nothing you do in DSS will change that.
The image that DSS pumps out will tend to be very dark and grey ( lacking in colour ). This is normal. Then you move to processing the image. You'll find that when you open the image in your processing software, it will already be lighter.
Let's get back to your original data though. As has been discussed in your previous thread, use a bahtinov mask for focus. Secondly and probably more appropriate to this thread is the quality of the initial image. The only way you will be able to initially decrease initial noise is to get your ISO down. Every camera has a point of invariance. You can google that but the simple explanation is the most effective ISO balancing brightness verses noise. ( it's more complex than that but that's keeping it simple ) The compromise to reducing ISO is you aren't getting enough data which means you need to increase the length of your subs. Only way to do that on your Alt-az mount is to make a wedge to take care of feild rotation. Unfortunely, as you're finding, it all has a cascading effect. One thing effects another and so on.
17 subs, you will soon come to realise, is not nearly enough to deal with signal to noise ratio. All cameras are noisy in low light. Obviously some more than others and dedicated cooled AP cameras less than the others. The idea of stacking is to increase the signal to noise ratio. More subs is the simple key here.
You say in your thread title that you're struggling...... We all did / are. We are all here to help though. Lean on us and use us for help as much as you like. What you are already doing is far more than a lot of people ever do and that includes professional photographers. Most don't even attempt it because it's hard so give yourself a pat on the back for what you have already done. Also don't forget that what you have already taken a photo of is 1,300 light years away !
I know that my ISO setting is a large part of the problem I am having with rendering; RAYMO has advised me that the sweet spot for my camera is around 1600; This I know will mean longer subs which, will introduce other issues (star trails, field rotation, etc...) but, it will be a balance I guess between ISO in a sweet spot & max exposure time possible on my current mount setup. I've been googling DIY wedges for my LX90.. have seen a few online now, just need to sit down & take the time to figure out precisely how to make one; still tossing up adjustable vs fixed (whole new range of complexity); the attachment of the wedge to my tripod seems relatively straight forward, the attachment to the fork mount however is not explained well in many of the examples I have seen.. still trying to figure out if I will need the Meade wedge adapter or if I can figure out another way to attach fork mount to DIY wedge. I note your comment on number of images... once we get some dry & clear skies, I will go again & focus purely on getting sharp focus using my Bhatinov mask, set at ISO 1600 & experiment a little with exposure length before capturing as many as I can. Don't get me wrong, I'm stoked with what I have captured.. just thought a bit of processing might make it infinitely better.. 'expectations vs reality', always a bit of a let down..
Quote:
Originally Posted by RyanJones
I have also just taken the step to an EQ mount and I'm not going to lie, it's a great step up although I'm not used to it yet. Having said that, this is my Orion on an alt-az mount with a small SCT . By far not the best you'll see but an idea of what can be done.
Hi Ryan, I think an EQ mount may come in time; as we discussed before, I want to see what I can achieve with what I have & now that I can see what others are achieving with similar setups I can see that significant improvement is indeed possible. In fact, my renders aren't as 'bad' as I thought they were... not good but, not disastrous either.
That's the spirit Carlton ! I am a massive believer in making the best of what you have. Mr. And Mrs. Celestron would be disgusted in what I did to my mount to make it work the way I did lol . The way I see it , the more you try to make things work, the more you understand why you're doing what you're doing and it will set you up to get the best of what ever equipment you have in the future. I won't block up your thread any more but if you need or would like suggestions on how to make a wedge, pm me. I'll be more than happy to help.
good luck Carlton
Get startools, its a pretty cool processing software
Download the trial version first for a month and see if you like it, there is heaps of utube videos that will take you through the steps on processing
Hi Calton
I think it is amazing that you produced such a great image really.
Two things to make a giant leap forward is a eq mount and star tools.
However keep working with what you have and try lower iso shorter exposures and lots of them...if you can look at each individual shot and eliminate those that are not as good as the others... try doing darks if only to get into the habit☺ I have not done darks for a long time and have to reprogram to get them back in the mix.
I may have missed it as I am rushing sorry but do you set up your fork mount to point at the pole...that can be done ...particularly now that there are aids for polar aligning...you may find you dont need an eq mount.
Anyways its great to see your effort and believe me you can be proud of your effort.
I hope to see more in the near future.
Alex
You have a couple of things here that don't favor a beginner. Firstly a long focal length, 2000mm not very forgiving on guiding errors and secondly a slow focal ratio at f10. The simplest solution is to shorten the focal length and speed up your f ratio with a reducer. https://www.bintel.com.au/product/meade-f6-3-focal-reducerfield-flattener/?v=6cc98ba2045f
Another solution for starting out is a piggy back mount, so you can use your wide field camera lens and the mounts tracking ability.
The most important thing is get get good data, you can't process whats not there, so good tracking, good focus and off course long enough exposures to capture the faint stuff. Good luck and most of all have fun.
Always great to see the encouragement on here; this is why I love this forum
Reducer is on the wish list... just wish the money flow could keep up
Cheers
Quote:
Originally Posted by doppler
Hi Carlton,
You have a couple of things here that don't favor a beginner. Firstly a long focal length, 2000mm not very forgiving on guiding errors and secondly a slow focal ratio at f10. The simplest solution is to shorten the focal length and speed up your f ratio with a reducer. https://www.bintel.com.au/product/meade-f6-3-focal-reducerfield-flattener/?v=6cc98ba2045f
Another solution for starting out is a piggy back mount, so you can use your wide field camera lens and the mounts tracking ability.
The most important thing is get get good data, you can't process whats not there, so good tracking, good focus and off course long enough exposures to capture the faint stuff. Good luck and most of all have fun.
Cheers Rick
Quote:
Originally Posted by xelasnave
Hi Calton
I think it is amazing that you produced such a great image really.
Two things to make a giant leap forward is a eq mount and star tools.
However keep working with what you have and try lower iso shorter exposures and lots of them...if you can look at each individual shot and eliminate those that are not as good as the others... try doing darks if only to get into the habit☺ I have not done darks for a long time and have to reprogram to get them back in the mix.
I may have missed it as I am rushing sorry but do you set up your fork mount to point at the pole...that can be done ...particularly now that there are aids for polar aligning...you may find you dont need an eq mount.
Anyways its great to see your effort and believe me you can be proud of your effort.
I hope to see more in the near future.
Alex
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jen
good luck Carlton
Get startools, its a pretty cool processing software
Download the trial version first for a month and see if you like it, there is heaps of utube videos that will take you through the steps on processing
good luck Carlton 
