Baffled ota extention

[xelasnave]

I dont see folk using this idea and its the only thing I can think of that may offer a small advantage when imaging.. Maybe not but I think Hubble uses this approach.
I tend to go overboard with stuff but in my best imaging days after I stopped posting photos I made up what could be best described as a long dew tube with baffles for each of my scopes. I am unable to get home and post a photo and the way things are going it will be a long time before I can go home it seems.
I believe my approach improved contrast but I never got around to taking comparison shots so I have no data to back up my belief.
But I am sure it improved the quality of my captures.
What do you think.. Have you done this.
As I said I am sure Hubble has a similar set up.
My idea was to eliminate any light that could enter the tube from sources stars mainly a little out of the field of view.
Do you think I engaged in overkill or does the idea have merit.
Alex

[multiweb (Marc)]

I flocked everything. Inside my C11, Newt, the dewshields, etc... I have internal baffles in my newt but I've never heard of baffles in dew tube extensions. I think the only thing you have to be careful with light baffles is that the edges are not shiny. Having said that I believe everything helps and contrast is improved if you can minimise the amount of stray light, especially from light polluted locations. Might be a little less obvious if you're under very darks skies but I wouldn't know. Never really compared.

[Robert_T]

certainly makes intuitive sense that this would help. Now you mention it I wonder though why we don't see more such external baffling?

[xelasnave]

This is the only hint I could find showing baffles as I described on The Hubble.

http://asd.gsfc.nasa.gov/archive/hub...gy/optics.html

Alex