Quote:
Originally Posted by strongmanmike
he, he, he...very cool 
how was the seeing for the later session/s?
Mike
ps. Now wipe that cheshire grin off your face |
Thanks mate! See FWHM plot attached. Note that this image was taken over 2 nights over that altitude range. The session on Sat night was the best seeing with min FWHM of 1.66 arcsec.
Grin? What grin??!
Quote:
Originally Posted by strongmanmike
psss. Just noticed your signature quote has changed too...ya happy now huh ?  |
Quote:
Originally Posted by alpal
|
High praise indeed! Thanks Allan! I hadn't actually seen the 32" version before.
Quote:
Originally Posted by alpal
...
It starting to get to the point where some people have professional equipment that belongs more in a govt. Observatory than with a private amateur.
Cheers
allan
|
Hmmm, not sure about the term "professional"
. That to me has connotations of modern, large aperture (>32") scopes with advanced AO. Go back 30+ years though and my scope might have made it into that category (a scope that professionals would use). It's true though that todays best amateur images match or best most pro images taken in the 70s & 80s. I'm more comfortable now saying that my beastie is in the league of best amateur scopes in the world.
Quote:
Originally Posted by strongmanmike
i did scout around marcus' huge 100% image with a big magnifying glass and managed to find some veeeery faint noise in couple of places  (heresy)...but no thin bright decon worms were found anywhere  
Mike |
There was noise that I processed out - predominantly in the sky background. Can't wait to commission the new STXL though so I can operate at -35C (this image was done at -15C).
Cheers, Marcus
but she just says wear ear plugs 
... she just doesn't understand erratic pixels - they just won't leave me alone! ...... Must get rid of the noise ... get rid of the noise ... the nooooooise! 
