As a self confessed processing "waste of space"...I have recently had my M42 data that I took between 2am and 3:30am on the 3rd January given the once over by Jeanette Dunphy who has kindly extracted more out of my data than I could ever do.
A total of 34 mins exposure through a Black Diamond 200mm Newtonian, on HEQ5Pro, using a Canon 1000D, Baader MPCC (for some) and guided using Orion Mini Guidescope and Toucam using PHD... varying subs of 15, 30, 60, 180 and 300 secs.
I have to sort out my collimation and fit some longer screws so the focus is better with the MPCC as the focuser was racked all the way in to JUST get focus (ish)....so please ignore the sloppy stars...
Thanks JJJ, I am in debt to you and I have enrolled in Photoshop 101 at my local community college...
I had heaps of fun out there again with cranky capture programs and am stoked that PHD was working a treat with my new Orion Mini Guide scope....I love it!....
The first photo is one of my 30 sec subs at ISO 1600 showing a Satellite trailing though it.... the second is the repro by Jeanette using 34 mins of my data.
A good start. Obviously more exposure time and some masking for the core would help bring more out but nonetheless it's looking good.
I'm hoping to give PHD a try when I get back to Australia later in the month and resume imaging again.
Good luck if you have another go with this one!! (and looking forward to seeing it too)
Darrin...
Thanks Darrin, I will be trying again with some shorter subs and / or lower ISO. I was quite happy with the guiding and the framing, the collimation needs work and with the longer screws, I need to test to see if I can still get focus with 1.25" EP's....
Quote:
Originally Posted by kinetic
Nice job Chris....err I mean J
I'm still waiting for her to do mine, Chris
Steve
Thanks Steve, I am just the data grunt, the real magic is in the processing, something which I am yet to master....so....JJJ did it for me...
Hoping to try for my first galaxy soon, now I am on the road and have the gear guiding well....what a rush when PHD locks on and stays there for over an hour with no "pings"....
hee hee, I'm data deprived. Glad you liked it.
You're going to have to take more darks and learn how to take flats if you want your images to stand out though.
Nice one Chris, The image has come up nicely but you must process yourself. Getting JJJ to do it is just a cop out. I'm sure you can do it if talked through it.
Nice one Chris, The image has come up nicely but you must process yourself. Getting JJJ to do it is just a cop out. I'm sure you can do it if talked through it.
Keep at it.
Yes Boss,
I WILL try harder next time, I promise.....
I have been working on this but not getting close....I think I can, I THINK I CAN......
You got the framing spot on indeed. Processing can actually be quite fun once you got yourself a flow that works and have familiarized yourself with the "beginner's sins"
One of those sins is clipping your image/signal. I'm not sure what went wrong with JJJ's image (she's usually right on the money!) but it suffers from some severe black clipping.
Another beginner's sin is to 'overcook' your image - not knowing when to stop, getting into a feedback loop of correcting your actions.
If you are sure you want to use PS, then start with a short flow (i.e. just a few essential operations), get to know them inside out, then start adding more of the more esotheric stuff to refine your flow. If you don't want to develop your own flow, steal someone else's - there are a good few tutorials out there.
Be careful with Photoshop 101 courses - they may be great for daytime photography but a horrible starting point for astrophotography as actions that are perfectly fine for daytime photography can completely destroy your precious data!
I was joking about the course....I am not enrolled in one, I was simply pointing out how crap my processing skills are....
I know what you mean, the eagerness of overprocessing to reveal things which you can sort of see, leads you to killing the main part of the image to try and tease out the finer details, something which I need to reign in...
In JJJ's defense, she didnt have too much quality data to work with, and there was a LOT of vignetting from no flats and only one dark to work with, so to get what she has, means she needed to hit it with a pretty big stick as the subs had a lot of washed out areas, either from light pollution or noisy camera (1000D).
And, considering my blown out core in the cruddy one I tried to process, the end result is about 1500 light years (see what I did there??? ) better than mine....
I appreciate all of the encouragement and tips and will continue playing with this data set as it is good practice to allow me to get to know the foibles and trickery and black magic of processing......until these clouds depart of course, then I am back out there with my sexy guiding newtonian.....yay!
um well....I'd seek professional advice......
