Jump to content

  •  

CNers have asked about a donation box for Cloudy Nights over the years, so here you go. Donation is not required by any means, so please enjoy your stay.

Photo

What's required to see the horsehead with direct vision?

NV
  • Please log in to reply
32 replies to this topic

#1 Antares89

Antares89

    Vostok 1

  • -----
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 189
  • Joined: 27 Apr 2016

Posted 02 February 2018 - 09:34 PM

I was out for a brief observing session a few minutes ago. My front yard is not too terribly dark. I didn't check tonight, but it's usually around 20 on my SQM-L. I was observing with my MOD-3 through a f3.8 guide scope to get around 7x magnification. I was also using an Astronomik 12nm H-alpha filter. Orion looked superb. It was really really cool to see a 'miniature' version of Orion. Before tonight, I had only seen it at much higher power.

 

I was able to see the Flame nebula although I couldn't make out too much detail. I could also see the background nebula that the horsehead is 'in front' of. However, the horsehead remained elusive. At times, I thought I caught a faint glimpse of an outline but so much averted imagination was required, it was hard to tell for sure.

 

I understand that there are probably several factors in play here but in general what kind of conditions and/or set up would I need to see the horsehead more prominently? My dark site is usually between 21.6-21.7 on my SQM-L. Would dark skies enhance contrast? Would I need a lens that is faster than my f3.8 guide scope?

 

Thanks



#2 nicoledoula

nicoledoula

    Apollo

  • *****
  • Posts: 1,180
  • Joined: 31 Jan 2018

Posted 02 February 2018 - 09:49 PM

BLACK skies + BIONIC eyes.   OH, through a telescope? smile.gif Black skies. Some say they've seen it in small scopes. 3-4" But  more aperture would make it easier. EAA makes it very easy in pretty bright skies they say......but you gotta pay to play.  Edit: didn't see that you were already using EAA  never mind.. Use your mod-3 with a bigger scope? 


Edited by nicoledoula, 02 February 2018 - 09:52 PM.


#3 starzonesteve

starzonesteve

    Viking 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 774
  • Joined: 17 May 2014
  • Loc: Central Alabama

Posted 02 February 2018 - 11:31 PM

I couldn't really make out the horse head with my 60mm refractor + PVS-7 but could clearly see it when I had the unit in my 8" reflector. Although NV thrives on speed, somethings don't seem to change - aperture trumps.

 

Forgot to mention - you may have better luck going from a 12mm to a 7mm Ha filter. That helped me out.


Edited by starzonesteve, 02 February 2018 - 11:33 PM.


#4 PEterW

PEterW

    Mercury-Atlas

  • *****
  • Posts: 2,732
  • Joined: 02 Jan 2006
  • Loc: SW London, UK

Posted 03 February 2018 - 03:47 AM

Huh, a couple of us made it out (averted vision) and it was just a fleeting “notch” in a TEC160 with 55mm plossl into an NV system via a 6nm filter. This with a virtually full moon overhead. The gain control helped to find the balance between detail and scintillation. The HH is small and mostly visible as a little gap.. longer focal lengths (bigger scopes) can give more scale and detail. It’s food to have several field of view options with NV depending on the objects.

PEterW

#5 chemisted

chemisted

    Viking 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 625
  • Joined: 24 Feb 2012

Posted 03 February 2018 - 07:28 AM

I recently had a very pretty view of the region with my NVD Micro and 12 nm Astronomik attached to a Nikkor 105 mm f/1.8 lens (4X).  I could see M42, the flame and the horsehead all in one gorgeous scene.  The horsehead was small, of course, and only a bump but very plainly visible and the flame had very nice detail.  Last night would have been two nights after full moon and I am guessing the moon was adding a lot of light to your sky.  Contrast would have suffered and this was probably a factor.  I did my observing from my dark sky site without a moon present.  Also, the very fast f/ratio is a huge benefit.



#6 PEterW

PEterW

    Mercury-Atlas

  • *****
  • Posts: 2,732
  • Joined: 02 Jan 2006
  • Loc: SW London, UK

Posted 03 February 2018 - 07:45 AM

I don’t recommend observing under a full moon, or significant light pollution.... just that we could still things.. though not of course as well as we could do under better conditions.

PEterW

#7 bobhen

bobhen

    Fly Me to the Moon

  • *****
  • Posts: 5,569
  • Joined: 25 Jun 2005

Posted 03 February 2018 - 08:07 AM

Using a 4” F5 achromat, my NVD Micro, and a 6nm Ha filter, I can easily see the Horsehead (the notch) from my heavily light-polluted location 8-miles from Philadelphia, PA.

 

Conditions can even be somewhat poor with mediocre transparency and the Horsehead only 45-degrees up or so. Of course, with better conditions, it only gets better.

 

Larger scopes, just as with unassisted visual, will start to show more detail.

 

And, just as with unassisted visual, no moon is better.

 

Using my Image Intensifier, the Horsehead is now a routine object!

 

Bob


  • mclewis1 likes this

#8 Antares89

Antares89

    Vostok 1

  • -----
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 189
  • Joined: 27 Apr 2016

Posted 03 February 2018 - 09:32 AM

Could a 6-7nm h-alpha filter produce better results than my 12nm h-alpha?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

#9 Napp

Napp

    Soyuz

  • *****
  • Moderators
  • Posts: 3,635
  • Joined: 26 Jul 2015
  • Loc: Northeast Florida, USA

Posted 03 February 2018 - 10:14 AM

Once saw it through a 20 inch dob with a h-beta filter.  Even then it was not easy.



#10 Antares89

Antares89

    Vostok 1

  • -----
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 189
  • Joined: 27 Apr 2016

Posted 03 February 2018 - 10:42 AM

I recently had a very pretty view of the region with my NVD Micro and 12 nm Astronomik attached to a Nikkor 105 mm f/1.8 lens (4X). I could see M42, the flame and the horsehead all in one gorgeous scene. The horsehead was small, of course, and only a bump but very plainly visible and the flame had very nice detail. Last night would have been two nights after full moon and I am guessing the moon was adding a lot of light to your sky. Contrast would have suffered and this was probably a factor. I did my observing from my dark sky site without a moon present. Also, the very fast f/ratio is a huge benefit.


How did you attach a filter to the nikkor 105mm?

Thanks

#11 bobhen

bobhen

    Fly Me to the Moon

  • *****
  • Posts: 5,569
  • Joined: 25 Jun 2005

Posted 03 February 2018 - 11:21 AM

Could a 6-7nm h-alpha filter produce better results than my 12nm h-alpha?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Yes

 

Bob



#12 chemisted

chemisted

    Viking 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 625
  • Joined: 24 Feb 2012

Posted 03 February 2018 - 03:05 PM

 

I recently had a very pretty view of the region with my NVD Micro and 12 nm Astronomik attached to a Nikkor 105 mm f/1.8 lens (4X). I could see M42, the flame and the horsehead all in one gorgeous scene. The horsehead was small, of course, and only a bump but very plainly visible and the flame had very nice detail. Last night would have been two nights after full moon and I am guessing the moon was adding a lot of light to your sky. Contrast would have suffered and this was probably a factor. I did my observing from my dark sky site without a moon present. Also, the very fast f/ratio is a huge benefit.


How did you attach a filter to the nikkor 105mm?

Thanks

 

You can get a Nikon to C-mount reducer from Adorama for about $30.  To attach the 1.25" filter to the inside of this adapter there are a couple of options.  I took an old, unwanted filter, removed the glass element and super-glued the ring into the adapter.  This takes up a bit of space but worked fine with the 105 mm Nikkor.  Jeff Morgan purchased an ENVIS to 1.25" adapter ring from Raf Camera (also about $30) and epoxied it into place.  This is probably a lower profile solution and a bit more elegant than my method.


Edited by chemisted, 03 February 2018 - 03:08 PM.


#13 Jeff Morgan

Jeff Morgan

    Voyager 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 13,652
  • Joined: 28 Sep 2003
  • Loc: Prescott, AZ

Posted 03 February 2018 - 09:17 PM

I understand that there are probably several factors in play here but in general what kind of conditions and/or set up would I need to see the horsehead more prominently? My dark site is usually between 21.6-21.7 on my SQM-L. Would dark skies enhance contrast? Would I need a lens that is faster than my f3.8 guide scope?

 

Thanks

 

City skies are fine for the HorseHead. City skies plus moonlight? I don't know because I choose to use those nights for non-astronomy pursuits. It seems to me that's really stacking the deck, but I'll let someone else weigh in on that.

 

A 12nm filter is workable. Tighter is better.

 

But more than anything else, image scale is what you need.

 

The HorseHead is fabulous in the Epsilon at 19x. That scope combines aperture (180mm) and speed (f/2.8).

 

I have also seen it very distinctly in a Meade ETX 90. Not much aperture (90mm) and not much speed (f/13.5). But lots of image scale, about 47x. The speed (or lack thereof) is starting to push the edge though. While an easily identifiable direct vision target, the image has noise and grain.

 

In the AstroTech ED60 I can make it out as a notch. Small aperture (60mm), decent speed (f/6). But at 13x, you would not recognize the shape without foreknowledge of what you were looking at. (My next step with this scope is a barlow, not attempted yet.)

 

Likewise in a 135mm telephoto lens. Small aperture, faster speed (f/2.8). But at 5x, it's just a bump. Without foreknowledge you could easily pass it by unaware. Instead, the eye is drawn to the Flame, Anglefish, or Orion nebula.

 

All things considered, I would guess the floor is somewhere around 15x for a recognizable view. Speed and aperture help of course, but the scale must be there.

 

 

And as you might guess aperture does take it up a few notches. The view through my 16" f/7 (103x) is absolutely eerie in presence and detail.


  • contrailmaker, chemisted and DMala like this

#14 Jeff Morgan

Jeff Morgan

    Voyager 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 13,652
  • Joined: 28 Sep 2003
  • Loc: Prescott, AZ

Posted 03 February 2018 - 09:23 PM

You can get a Nikon to C-mount reducer from Adorama for about $30.  To attach the 1.25" filter to the inside of this adapter there are a couple of options.  I took an old, unwanted filter, removed the glass element and super-glued the ring into the adapter.  This takes up a bit of space but worked fine with the 105 mm Nikkor.  Jeff Morgan purchased an ENVIS to 1.25" adapter ring from Raf Camera (also about $30) and epoxied it into place.  This is probably a lower profile solution and a bit more elegant than my method.

 

 

Yes, epoxying a ring is workable, with a few drawbacks - finger space for threading filters on and off is rather tight. You will be spending time after each session removing thumbprints.

 

And it is not fast for filter changes either.

 

But it will get you into the game quick and cheap. A lot to be said for that.

 

Currently I am migrating to 2" filter format to thread them onto the front of the telephoto. Results pending some good observing weather ...



#15 SeymoreStars

SeymoreStars

    Gemini

  • *****
  • Posts: 3,438
  • Joined: 08 May 2014
  • Loc: Pennsyltucky

Posted 03 February 2018 - 09:29 PM

My house has 20+SQM-L skies. I carried my televue genesis sdf out put it down and with a Mod3 -cmount (L3 filmless white phosphorus.) I saw the HH outline instantly.


  • contrailmaker and cosmic wind like this

#16 Stargazer3236

Stargazer3236

    Aurora

  • ****-
  • Posts: 4,968
  • Joined: 07 Aug 2010
  • Loc: Waltham, MA

Posted 14 February 2018 - 08:43 PM

Back in 1987, I was using my Coulter 13.1" Dob, 20mm wide field eyepiece and an H-beta filter. In the freezing 10* F temps with a 20 mph wind, straddled up against a nearby building at my astronomy clubs remote location, I noticed the Horsehead only briefly. It was a bifurcation in the middle of a faint nebulous band. I could not see the shape of the head itself, but just a straight band of nebulosity with a faint black slot cut into the middle. I had a group of 5 people with me that could barely see it too.



#17 highfnum

highfnum

    Fly Me to the Moon

  • *****
  • Posts: 5,493
  • Joined: 06 Sep 2006
  • Loc: NE USA

Posted 14 February 2018 - 08:55 PM

Did it with 10 inch coulter and UHC filter

cold clear sky

but just barely and

tapped scope to move image

that made  it a bit easier 

 

flame and vail are a cake walk compared to HH



#18 Kevdog

Kevdog

    Surveyor 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 1,818
  • Joined: 11 Jul 2012
  • Loc: Phoenix, AZ

Posted 15 February 2018 - 11:39 AM

And as you might guess aperture does take it up a few notches. The view through my 16" f/7 (103x) is absolutely eerie in presence and detail.

Yes, you really need image scale in this case.   So a longer focal length is needed, but to keep it fast, then you have to go up in aperture too.   It is pretty amazing and EASY to see in my 18" f4.5.  I was hoping to look again last weekend but by the time I got out Orion was too low for my dob!

 

In SQM-L 21.3 skies, I couldn't see it at all with my 18" and an H-Beta filter.   But putting in the NV and H-Alpha 7nm and it was obvious and clear!

 

But that said, I can see the nebula and dark "streak" in it even at 2x with the Owl 50mm f1.3 lens and the 2" filter in front of it.


Edited by Kevdog, 15 February 2018 - 11:43 AM.


#19 Kevdog

Kevdog

    Surveyor 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 1,818
  • Joined: 11 Jul 2012
  • Loc: Phoenix, AZ

Posted 15 February 2018 - 11:42 AM

Yes, epoxying a ring is workable, with a few drawbacks - finger space for threading filters on and off is rather tight. You will be spending time after each session removing thumbprints.
 
And it is not fast for filter changes either.
 
But it will get you into the game quick and cheap. A lot to be said for that.
 
Currently I am migrating to 2" filter format to thread them onto the front of the telephoto. Results pending some good observing weather ...


I got an adapter from Ebay for about $15. I'm thinking of just getting another adapter and a 1.25" filter and then gluing a ring into that. Instead of changing filters, I'll just change adapters!

I'm looking for a good Nikon 130mm + that is under f2. My 200mm f4 is nice and clear, but a bit too slow for filtering. Once I find that, it'll be worth setting up the adapter.

 

Doing that means I'll stick with Nikon lenses for the compatibility.



#20 Jeff Morgan

Jeff Morgan

    Voyager 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 13,652
  • Joined: 28 Sep 2003
  • Loc: Prescott, AZ

Posted 15 February 2018 - 11:50 PM

I got an adapter from Ebay for about $15. I'm thinking of just getting another adapter and a 1.25" filter and then gluing a ring into that. Instead of changing filters, I'll just change adapters!

 

Hmmm. That should be somewhat faster and easier.

 

For now, the approach I have settled on takes advantage of my normal observing style. That is, my target lists are constellation based, and generally cover a smaller section of sky. So I go over that section one time with each filter I intend to use, skipping list items that are "incorrect" for the filter in place.

 

Eventually, the filter drawer. Have to buy machine heads and carbon fiber this month for the Dob project laugh.gif



#21 GeezerGazer

GeezerGazer

    Apollo

  • *****
  • Posts: 1,415
  • Joined: 06 Jan 2005
  • Loc: Modesto, CA

Posted 15 February 2018 - 11:54 PM

Antares89, 

Here are a couple of photos to see the scale difference between my 60mm VersaScope finder at f:3.8 (9x), using a 5nm filter from a (LP scale) green zone and my 140 refractor at +/- f:5 (+/- 26x; using a .5x reducer set very close to the Mod 3C sensor) at the same location on the same night. These are stacked photos so a little brighter than the actual live image in the Mod 3C, but they fairly represent what I could see.  The HH was visible as a notch with 60mm @ 9x, and as the actual head feature with 140 @ about 26x.  

 

The 12nm filter works nicely, but for photos, I find the 5nm or the 7nm to be a little better for showing the contrast difference; keeping the background a little darker to highlight the reflected light of the nebula.  These are phone photos, so not the best, but you can clearly see the difference in the scale.  I hope they help to show what has been discussed. I can only imagine the difference a large, fast Dob with NV would make in this image.  

 

I completed some H-a filter testing over the last several months with another CNer Matt McBee (report submitted last week as an article, but not published yet) and found very subtle differences between 5 & 7nm H-a filters through my scopes.  The article should be coming soon and may be of some interest to you. 

 

First is the 60mm refractor; 1/2 sec. exposure stacked for 3 seconds; you can see the notch mentioned in previous posts:

IMG_8430.JPG

 

This is the same night about 2 hours earlier through the 140 refractor; 1/2 sec. stacked for 4 seconds; you can make out the Horse Head fairly well.  The extra second of stacking doesn't make the image brighter, it just smoothes out the grainy effect of a shorter stacking process.

IMG_8386.JPG


Edited by GeezerGazer, 16 February 2018 - 12:12 AM.

  • Jeff Morgan, contrailmaker and Lukes1040 like this

#22 outofsight

outofsight

    Surveyor 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 1,711
  • Joined: 31 May 2015

Posted 16 February 2018 - 03:30 PM

That TEC 140 of the Horse Head is outstanding. 



#23 GeezerGazer

GeezerGazer

    Apollo

  • *****
  • Posts: 1,415
  • Joined: 06 Jan 2005
  • Loc: Modesto, CA

Posted 16 February 2018 - 04:53 PM

That TEC 140 of the Horse Head is outstanding. 

Both photos are straight from the phone... no editing or post processing.  It is amazing what NV does for us.  



#24 outofsight

outofsight

    Surveyor 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 1,711
  • Joined: 31 May 2015

Posted 16 February 2018 - 07:26 PM

"It is amazing what NV does for us." It's amazing how well your phone pics portray NV. I've seen lots of phone pics through NV, but don't think I've ever seen one that presented the Horsehead so well. Maybe I recall incorrectly, but the Horsehead with the Flame area seem to be very cleanly and precisely presented for a phone pic, noticeably better than what I'm used to, excellent work.

 

Often in discussions about NV people will say, "but it looks a lot better through the eyepiece," and most of the time it does when people are just trying to grab a quick shot through the NV. It's simply very nice to see a phone representing NV at such a fine and exact level.

 

Normally you have to get a jdbastro photo, or some such, to get such high quality photos. Very cool.


  • contrailmaker likes this

#25 GeezerGazer

GeezerGazer

    Apollo

  • *****
  • Posts: 1,415
  • Joined: 06 Jan 2005
  • Loc: Modesto, CA

Posted 18 February 2018 - 03:20 AM

I understand that there are probably several factors in play here but in general what kind of conditions and/or set up would I need to see the horsehead more prominently? My dark site is usually between 21.6-21.7 on my SQM-L. Would dark skies enhance contrast? Would I need a lens that is faster than my f3.8 guide scope?

 

Antares89, 

You also asked if a 6-7nm H-a filter would help... and I saw at least one reply was a resounding yes.  

 

Filters of differing band pass or narrower band pass can make a difference, but under certain types of conditions, you will see little difference.  

 

I went out tonight with my TEC 140 at home which is a bright red zone specifically to photograph the difference between a 12, 7 & 5nm H-a filter under pretty severe light pollution.  I found it difficult to keep the exposures equal, but did my best.  A 7nm filter allows much less light to pass than a 12nm filter; and the 5nm allows even less.  I compensated by boosting the ISO and also used the brightness setting to get them close (you can see that the images become progressively more grainy as the ISO was raised).  But the length of exposure for each frame was 1/2 second, stacked for only 2 seconds.  When you look at these photos, you will see a brighter sky than the photos above that I posted to show the scale difference.  That's because NV enhances all of the light that comes to its sensor.  At a dark site like my green zone, the sky stays dark in the photo.  At a red zone, the sky is much brighter.  When the background sky is brighter there is less contrast between the H-a object and the sky... the H-a object just doesn't stand out as much.  Here are the examples of the difference between filters from the Red Zone:

 

IMG_8493.JPG

IMG_8499.JPG

IMG_8498.JPG

 

From top to bottom, they are photos through the Astronomik 12nm, Optolong 7nm, & Astrodon 5nm filters at 38x.  Light pollution combined with moisture in the air greatly inhibits the performance of these filters when used with NV... that is the effect of LP combined with limited transparency.  The photos speak for themselves.  I wish I had bumped up the ISO on the 12nm image to make it closer to the brightness of the 7 & 5, but I think it is good enough to show the subtle differences between these three filters.  I do not use a tracking mount, so these exposures have to be quite short.  Visually, when looking into the NVD eyepiece, the image seen is quite different than these photos show, because I compensated for less light through the 5 & 7 filters.  Had I not upped the ISO, you would have seen a very dark image with a very faint H-a object.  That can sometimes be helpful in light pollution because the narrower band does darken the sky background.  If moisture and particulate pollution (transparency) is not too great, the H-a object will stand out more... the more "stuff" there is in the atmosphere, the more light is reflected, which washes out the H-a object.

 

To my eye, there is only subtle difference in the detail shown by the three filters and that is true when I look through the NV eye lens.  And there are other issues that follow the narrower band filters.  When used on the Envis lens at 1x, the 5nm suffers Band Shift, so that the H-a object only appears in the center 65-70% of the image... beyond that, as it moves closer to the edge of FoV, it simply disappears.  My experience is that the 7nm filter is good for the center 75-80%, and the 12nm filter only suffers band shift in the outer 5% of the FoV.  I did not take a specific photo of that phenomenon, but I'll try next time out with the 1x.  Through my telescopes, band shift is not seen when using any of the filters.

 

But I did take three 1x photos, all at 1/2 second/10 sec. stacking, with all three filters, to demo their differences under red zone light pollution on Barnard's Loop.  BTW, moisture tonight was listed as 55-60%, so not terribly high for this time of year here in the Central Valley of CA.  Again, they are in order T-B, 12, 7 & 5:

 

IMG_8511.JPG

IMG_8514.JPG

IMG_8512.JPG

 

Although showing band shift was not the purpose of these photos, you can see the increasing effect of band shift in the 7 & 5nm images; it appears as the darker green area at the outer edge of the field.  

 

Using the 12nm filter allows a lower setting on the gain and ISO and the image nearly always shows more stars.  The 7 and 5 filters decrease the amount of light that passes, and the light that does is limited to a specific band width, so stars strong in lower wave lengths become dim or disappear.  The narrower filters show starlight, just not as much as the wider band.  In photography, they also require a faster ISO which is more grainy in appearance.

 

In my limited experience, I have found that I see MUCH MORE through H-a filters from a dark site.  The results between my bright red zone at home and the green zone 40 miles distant is dramatic, clearly demonstrated in some of my better photos compared to those in this post.  At a dark site, I find the narrower band filters much more useful, because the background sky is not light colored.  For that reason, the H-a objects stand out as being much brighter.  This usually permits greater study of detail... as long as the nebula is reflecting light within the limits of the filter's pass band.  The light from some nebulae is not within those limits, so they are not enhanced by the narrower filter.

 

Here is a really good example of how different the nebula and sky background look from a green zone and a red zone, IC 59, Gamma Cass, both taken at 1/2 sec/5 sec. stacking:

 

IMG_8400.JPG IMG_8505.JPG

 

The dark zone image is a slightly smaller scale; a reducer was used at +/-.75, but both photos were through the 140.  In the green zone, the upside down "V" is pretty obvious (in a larger photo is very obvious), while the photo from the red zone barely reveals IC 59... less contrast; both with the 5nm filter.  If you cannot see IC59 in the red zone image, concentrate your sight on the very center of the circle and use averted vision to see IC59 nearby at about 2 o'clock.  In both photos, the upside-down "V" points toward the bright star, Gamma Cassiopeia.  

 

I hope this helps you draw some conclusions about H-a filters, but more importantly, about the effects of light pollution when it is combined with marginal or poor transparency.  Atmospheric moisture and particulate pollution can play a major role in how both NV and H-a filters perform.  Mainly, I have found only subtle differences between my 5nm and 7nm H-a filters; the 12nm does reveal less perceived contrast, but shows the sky more as we expect it to look through a glass eyepiece.  If I was comparing a 6nm filter to my 5 or my 7, I might not even see a difference under my skies.  This is opinion of course, based on my experience, with my equipment, and under my skies.  But it is what made me decide that if I was going to try to observe H-a targets, I would do it from my green zone site, not my home.  H-a is simply much better from the darker zone which also presents a more transparent sky.  From my red zone home, nebulae are marginal targets.  I am spoiled by seeing them from my green zone.  Using an IR filter at my red zone home, globulars and open clusters are usually quite nice and are better targets for me.

Ray


Edited by GeezerGazer, 18 February 2018 - 03:07 PM.

  • contrailmaker, starzonesteve, Adger and 1 other like this


CNers have asked about a donation box for Cloudy Nights over the years, so here you go. Donation is not required by any means, so please enjoy your stay.


Recent Topics





Also tagged with one or more of these keywords: NV



Cloudy Nights LLC
Cloudy Nights Sponsor: Astronomics