The Astro-Imaging Thread

[munlander1]

Unfortunately, the sky is mostly cloudy. hopefully tomorrow I'll be able to get out again. 

[PB666]

http://start.att.net/player/category/news/article/geobeats-asteroid_nasa_once_called_potentially_hazardous_wi-5min

[_Augustus_]

Moar afocal with the 6" f/4.5:

https://www.astrobin.com/323352/

[Guest]

Meade 3.5 in f 8.8 with logitech C310 prime focus. 

 

 

[_Augustus_]

19 hours ago, dundun92 said:

Meade 3.5 in f 8.8 with logitech C310 prime focus. 

 

 

That's remarkably good. 90mm refractor I presume?

[Guest]

2 hours ago, _Augustus_ said:

That's remarkably good. 90mm refractor I presume?

Yep, it is. My only issue is that the mount is a bit shaky, which makes fine-tuning focus a bit hard. I only have one other video clip that comes anywhere near in quality. 

Edited November 29, 2017 by Guest

[Matuchkin]

Jupiter as I saw it on the 9-10 of June. Taken with super-duper space-grade flabbergastingly amazing LG-G3 phone camera, held to the eyepiece with microscopic precision by the iron grip of my fist. Take that, NASA!

Edited December 2, 2017 by Matuchkin

[_Augustus_]

10 minutes ago, Matuchkin said:

Jupiter as I saw it on the 9-10 of June. Taken with super-duper space-grade flabbergastingly amazing LG-G3 phone camera, held to the eyepiece with microscopic precision by the iron grip of my fist. Take that, NASA!

I can just see a hint of the GRS. Try using video and stacking with a shorter FL eyepiece; I'm sure you can get something a lot better even with just your phone.

[Matuchkin]

1 hour ago, _Augustus_ said:

I can just see a hint of the GRS. Try using video and stacking with a shorter FL eyepiece; I'm sure you can get something a lot better even with just your phone.

Sadly, that photograph is possibly the luckiest I have, and no other such photograph is under my possession, so I don't really have any stacking material. I tried to play around in photo editors to get the GRS and cloud bands to stand out, but I couldn't achieve much. Truth be told, this is my most prised photo as of yet, and I am distributing it where possible (facebook, this forum thread, etc) so that I can have as much backup of it as possible.

[Guest]

Aligned with iMerge.

[_Augustus_]

9 hours ago, dundun92 said:

Aligned with iMerge.

Nice photo. Fitswork will do a better job than iMerge did, and there won't be those ugly lines between segments.

Edited December 25, 2017 by _Augustus_

[_Augustus_]

https://www.astrobin.com/326635/?nc=user

[Guest]

6 hours ago, _Augustus_ said:

Nice photo. Fitswork will do a better job than iMerge did, and there won't be those ugly lines between segments.

Will try!

[LaydeeDem]

On 11/22/2017 at 1:05 PM, _Augustus_ said:

These images' fuzziness even with stacking correspond to your scope being out of collimation. I think you could get a lot better than this if you tried collimating your scope. If you don't have a collimation tool, try defocusing a star at high power and adjusting the primary until the secondary shadow is centered.

Thank you for the advice. My scope is poorly made and lacks any way to collimate the primary mirror, but I'll see what I can do.

[Guest]

AutoStakkert stack

[_Augustus_]

42 minutes ago, dundun92 said:

AutoStakkert stack

Looks like there might be dust on your sensor.

A few nights ago I managed to get something like 15,000 frames on the Moon, but the largest file (12,000 frames) was so big it crashes my computer when I try to convert it from mp3 to avi, and I'm having problems processing the part I can use. Still got this:

[Guest]

9 minutes ago, _Augustus_ said:

Looks like there might be dust on your sensor.

A few nights ago I managed to get something like 15,000 frames on the Moon, but the largest file (12,000 frames) was so big it crashes my computer when I try to convert it from mp3 to avi, and I'm having problems processing the part I can use. Still got this:

Yep, I know about the dust. I have no idea how it got there. (As usual) I cover it when not in use...

[_Augustus_]

2 hours ago, dundun92 said:

Yep, I know about the dust. I have no idea how it got there. (As usual) I cover it when not in use...

Try using a bulb blower on it to remove the dust from the chip.

[munlander1]

Are flat frames necessary for dso's?

[Rareden]

54 minutes ago, munlander1 said:

Are flat frames necessary for dso's?

not terribly, you can do pretty well with decent software like pixinsight or a fake flat in photoshop

[Rareden]

On 12/29/2017 at 3:29 PM, _Augustus_ said:

Try using a bulb blower on it to remove the dust from the chip.

also hold it with the sensor facing the ground when doing so,
if its a dslr check if it has a sensor cleaning feature and cycle that a few times with it facing the ground with no lens

[Green Baron]

On 2.1.2018 at 7:42 AM, munlander1 said:

Are flat frames necessary for dso's?

That depends. From what i read few people make them.

With flat frames you want to correct different illumination in your setup, like vignetting, dust on surfaces in the path (filters), or maybe a streetlight that gives a slightly lighter border on one side.

If you can exclude or minimise these things before they appear then flatframes aren't necessarily necessary.

Dark and bias frames are.

Edited January 3, 2018 by Green Baron

[_Augustus_]

It's far from perfect but at least I have the full thing now. Reprocessed video from the 26th.

[Rareden]

1 hour ago, _Augustus_ said:

It's far from perfect but at least I have the full thing now. Reprocessed video from the 26th.

 

Bottom is looking very nice.

Finaly seemed to have fixed my differential flexure issues with my setup, exposures before and after, 2 min before, 12min after. noise issue of course because i did no processing on them

Edited January 19, 2018 by Rareden

[munlander1]

Almost clear sky tonight...except for the northern portion. Very thick. They are also blocking Polaris...it's almost 12:00am for me sssooo, looks like no astrophotography this week!