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

Imaging tips questions

  • Please log in to reply
12 replies to this topic

#1 TareqPhoto

TareqPhoto

    Aurora

  • -----
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 4,960
  • Joined: 20 Feb 2017
  • Loc: Ajman - UAE

Posted 19 January 2020 - 06:05 AM

Hi again,

 

So after i managed to get the guiding to work now it became more fun for imaging, and although the sky isn't much clear here for several days but we got few nights with clear sky so i tried something as well, and now i have new plans and also questions so i can try my best for next time, i am waiting the summer because it has more clear skies regardless the humidity and heat, and Cygnus alone has LOTS of targets that will keep me busy the whole summer.

 

So, let's start the questions and plans to see how it will help me.

 

1. What is your choice for plate solving, a dedicated software or a built-in one such in SGPro? I don't know what exactly i need for making that P.S. working perfectly and getting me to the target i was doing exactly, although i can get to that target i need without any issues, maybe it won't be very accurate 100% in same position but i can center it as much as i can, so not sure if PS in this case is needed, for another setup it will make it easier.

 

2. I was using a lens, and for the bad luck it was at wide open [F/2.8], so that it will have issue on stars, and that is why i didn't post the result because it sounds it is about the stars not about the target itself, so i want to see how can i solve that wit a lens, to stop it down only? Or i just shoot wide open and don't care about stars at all?

 

3. Guiding is working nicely now, i tested 10min exposure and it works, so is it really necessary to make it even more complicated and got for much longer than 10min exposures for any reason? I am not a good guy in reading or measuring things such as SNR and ADU and those things YET, so if i have to know those it means i have to stop imaging until i understand then try again, should i or i keep imaging anyway?

 

4. I returned back to use my 36mm NB Optolong filters, and i really don't know why, but SII getting much worse results than OIII, i mean i see much more gradients on SII data or frames than with OIII, and i though that OIII is the worst, so what's going on? I do have OIII 3nm but because i don't have the filter wheel for 1.25" and also i am still planning to get that SII 3nm later so i am back to use 7nm/6.5nm SHO filters anyway.

 

5. Is there any option for having an autofocuser or a motor for lenses that is working great without issues? If i am planning to have autofocuser for my scopes then i like to have that for lenses too.

 

6. On Facebook i did ask something as i wanted to have more likers there with answers than technical experts answers here which may put me completely lost, but i will ask it anyway, i do have one mono camera which is QHY163M, so happy with it, now after managing that guiding and starting to have fun i decided to buy another COOLED camera, but i am into few options here as following:

 

a. Buying same mono camera i have either QHY163M or better ASI1600MM because their filter wheel is better accommodating 1.25" and cheaper, while with QHY163M i have to buy their filter wheel as they have short adapter to make the camera closer to the filter wheel so closer to filters, but i am still not sure if their Standard version of FW is ok for 1.25", and then the back focus, ZWO solved this issue perfectly.

b. Buying a color camera same model of my mono camera, so i use it for RGB and using mono for NB then combine them later

c. Buying a mono camera different than my camera regardless which scope, because i don't have one scope or optics to use, so is it good to have different just in case to match that sampling thing maybe?

d. Buying a color camera different than my camera model, such as 071MC/294MC or 367C[or QHY FF/APS-C] and something like that, i keep seeing nice results from people using color cameras even under bad LP Bortle skies, and i do have a 2" LP filter that maybe it can help slightly

 

 

I did ask on this forum before about using achromatic refractor vs. APO because with using 2 cameras let's say mono i can use each scope or lens for one filter to collect, so definitely i am focusing each perfectly as possible, thus i asked, is it is really necessary for an APO as i will never stop my plan for Tak FSQ so i wanted something very very cheap cheaper than $500 ref scope which won't be a waste after i am getting that Tak FSQ and not selling it.

 

I really really hope to get into this very serious and start to produce nicer results, i wasted almost 2 years before without figuring out the guiding and that alone did ruin most of my imaging really, was a very stupid small silly mistake or fault that it is fixed now and won't make same mistake again at all, so that i am trying to put the best i can and buy few things to make life easier for me or quicker, this astro imaging is never easy, and from Bortle 8/9 sky it is even much more difficult and challenging, and i always read or hear about doing hours and hours of single target, so i have to go with multiple cameras then to save time for collecting data as possible, let's see how do you think about it in that case.

 

Thank you



#2 WadeH237

WadeH237

    Fly Me to the Moon

  • *****
  • Posts: 5,278
  • Joined: 24 Feb 2007
  • Loc: Snohomish, WA

Posted 19 January 2020 - 08:06 AM

Hi again,
 
So after i managed to get the guiding to work now it became more fun for imaging, and although the sky isn't much clear here for several days but we got few nights with clear sky so i tried something as well, and now i have new plans and also questions so i can try my best for next time, i am waiting the summer because it has more clear skies regardless the humidity and heat, and Cygnus alone has LOTS of targets that will keep me busy the whole summer.
 
So, let's start the questions and plans to see how it will help me.
 
1. What is your choice for plate solving, a dedicated software or a built-in one such in SGPro? I don't know what exactly i need for making that P.S. working perfectly and getting me to the target i was doing exactly, although i can get to that target i need without any issues, maybe it won't be very accurate 100% in same position but i can center it as much as i can, so not sure if PS in this case is needed, for another setup it will make it easier.

The imaging software that you use will be the main factor here. If you are using SGP, the PlateSolve2 solver works quite well. The biggest thing to be careful with, is to make sure that you set the image scale correctly. If it fails to solve, in most cases that's the problem.
 

2. I was using a lens, and for the bad luck it was at wide open [F/2.8], so that it will have issue on stars, and that is why i didn't post the result because it sounds it is about the stars not about the target itself, so i want to see how can i solve that wit a lens, to stop it down only? Or i just shoot wide open and don't care about stars at all?

I don't generally image through camera lenses, but I understand that stopping them down a bit helps tremendously on stars.

Regarding your question about the importance of stars, that's a pretty subjective thing. In my opinion, stars are an important part of the image, and I spend a good amount of effort to make sure that my processing doesn't negatively affect them.
 

3. Guiding is working nicely now, i tested 10min exposure and it works, so is it really necessary to make it even more complicated and got for much longer than 10min exposures for any reason? I am not a good guy in reading or measuring things such as SNR and ADU and those things YET, so if i have to know those it means i have to stop imaging until i understand then try again, should i or i keep imaging anyway?

If you are happy with your 10 minute exposures, then you should be good to go. There's not much to gain by going longer than that, with the possible exception of narrow band imaging - and even then, 10 minutes is perfectly fine.

Regarding technical stuff, don't ever let that stop you from imaging! It's great to learn more of the technical stuff, but actually making images is the very best way to get better at this!
 

4. I returned back to use my 36mm NB Optolong filters, and i really don't know why, but SII getting much worse results than OIII, i mean i see much more gradients on SII data or frames than with OIII, and i though that OIII is the worst, so what's going on? I do have OIII 3nm but because i don't have the filter wheel for 1.25" and also i am still planning to get that SII 3nm later so i am back to use 7nm/6.5nm SHO filters anyway.

Most objects are quite dim in SII. You'll probably need much more total exposure time with the SII filter than with the others to get the similar results.
 

5. Is there any option for having an autofocuser or a motor for lenses that is working great without issues? If i am planning to have autofocuser for my scopes then i like to have that for lenses too.
 
6. On Facebook i did ask something as i wanted to have more likers there with answers than technical experts answers here which may put me completely lost, but i will ask it anyway, i do have one mono camera which is QHY163M, so happy with it, now after managing that guiding and starting to have fun i decided to buy another COOLED camera, but i am into few options here as following:
 
a. Buying same mono camera i have either QHY163M or better ASI1600MM because their filter wheel is better accommodating 1.25" and cheaper, while with QHY163M i have to buy their filter wheel as they have short adapter to make the camera closer to the filter wheel so closer to filters, but i am still not sure if their Standard version of FW is ok for 1.25", and then the back focus, ZWO solved this issue perfectly.
b. Buying a color camera same model of my mono camera, so i use it for RGB and using mono for NB then combine them later
c. Buying a mono camera different than my camera regardless which scope, because i don't have one scope or optics to use, so is it good to have different just in case to match that sampling thing maybe?
d. Buying a color camera different than my camera model, such as 071MC/294MC or 367C[or QHY FF/APS-C] and something like that, i keep seeing nice results from people using color cameras even under bad LP Bortle skies, and i do have a 2" LP filter that maybe it can help slightly
 
 
I did ask on this forum before about using achromatic refractor vs. APO because with using 2 cameras let's say mono i can use each scope or lens for one filter to collect, so definitely i am focusing each perfectly as possible, thus i asked, is it is really necessary for an APO as i will never stop my plan for Tak FSQ so i wanted something very very cheap cheaper than $500 ref scope which won't be a waste after i am getting that Tak FSQ and not selling it.

In my opinion, a triplet APO is far superior for imaging than anything less. You can get something like an Explore Scientific 80mm F/6 triplet for $850. Add a field flattener to it, and you'll get results similar to what you could expect with an FSQ 106 (unless you have a camera with a huge sensor). Often times in this hobby, you have to pay a huge premium to get that last 20% of performance, and I think that applies here. When you are ready for the FSQ, you can easily sell the Explore Scientific. But until then, you can get great results at a fraction of the cost.
 

I really really hope to get into this very serious and start to produce nicer results, i wasted almost 2 years before without figuring out the guiding and that alone did ruin most of my imaging really, was a very stupid small silly mistake or fault that it is fixed now and won't make same mistake again at all, so that i am trying to put the best i can and buy few things to make life easier for me or quicker, this astro imaging is never easy, and from Bortle 8/9 sky it is even much more difficult and challenging, and i always read or hear about doing hours and hours of single target, so i have to go with multiple cameras then to save time for collecting data as possible, let's see how do you think about it in that case.

I think about this very differently.

 

I generally spend at least two full nights on each target, and often times more.  I'm not sure why you need to save time (for me, at least, this is a leisure activity, so spending more time doing it is a good thing).  You may not be familiar with the climate in the Pacific Northwest, but we have a fairly uncommon situation here.  The Seattle area is located between two mountain ranges, the Olympics to the west, and the Cascades to the east.  Weather moves in from the Pacific Ocean and splits to go around the north and south ends of the Olympics.  It converges in the Seattle area and then runs into the Cascades just to the east.  The result is that we have very few clear nights.  The rain that Seattle is famous for, isn't what most people think of as rain.  It's more of a continuous, misty drizzle.  It's not uncommon to go months between clear nights.

 

Yet even with that kind of challenging weather, I still don't try and cut my imaging time short.  I generally say that astrophotography is an activity for the patient.

 

YMMV.

 

Thank you


  • psandelle, Gipht and TareqPhoto like this

#3 jerahian

jerahian

    Viking 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 846
  • Joined: 02 Aug 2018
  • Loc: Maine

Posted 19 January 2020 - 08:11 AM

1) Use the integrated plate-solver.  I used ASTAP with NINA, and SGP supports that too with their latest release.

2) 

3) Really no need to go beyond 10 mins, and with your Bortle 8/9 sky, your going to have to shorten those exposures to keep your frames from saturating.

4) 

5) Check out astromechanics.org.  They make ASCOM enabled Canon EF lens controller.

6)

 

Have fun and don’t be so hard on yourself.  We all make mistakes; it’s a big part of AP!

 

GL&CS!


  • psandelle likes this

#4 bobzeq25

bobzeq25

    Hubble

  • *****
  • Posts: 18,388
  • Joined: 27 Oct 2014

Posted 19 January 2020 - 11:37 AM

Hi again,

 

So after i managed to get the guiding to work now it became more fun for imaging, and although the sky isn't much clear here for several days but we got few nights with clear sky so i tried something as well, and now i have new plans and also questions so i can try my best for next time, i am waiting the summer because it has more clear skies regardless the humidity and heat, and Cygnus alone has LOTS of targets that will keep me busy the whole summer.

 

So, let's start the questions and plans to see how it will help me.

 

1. What is your choice for plate solving, a dedicated software or a built-in one such in SGPro? I don't know what exactly i need for making that P.S. working perfectly and getting me to the target i was doing exactly, although i can get to that target i need without any issues, maybe it won't be very accurate 100% in same position but i can center it as much as i can, so not sure if PS in this case is needed, for another setup it will make it easier.

 

2. I was using a lens, and for the bad luck it was at wide open [F/2.8], so that it will have issue on stars, and that is why i didn't post the result because it sounds it is about the stars not about the target itself, so i want to see how can i solve that wit a lens, to stop it down only? Or i just shoot wide open and don't care about stars at all?

 

3. Guiding is working nicely now, i tested 10min exposure and it works, so is it really necessary to make it even more complicated and got for much longer than 10min exposures for any reason? I am not a good guy in reading or measuring things such as SNR and ADU and those things YET, so if i have to know those it means i have to stop imaging until i understand then try again, should i or i keep imaging anyway?

 

4. I returned back to use my 36mm NB Optolong filters, and i really don't know why, but SII getting much worse results than OIII, i mean i see much more gradients on SII data or frames than with OIII, and i though that OIII is the worst, so what's going on? I do have OIII 3nm but because i don't have the filter wheel for 1.25" and also i am still planning to get that SII 3nm later so i am back to use 7nm/6.5nm SHO filters anyway.

 

5. Is there any option for having an autofocuser or a motor for lenses that is working great without issues? If i am planning to have autofocuser for my scopes then i like to have that for lenses too.

 

6. On Facebook i did ask something as i wanted to have more likers there with answers than technical experts answers here which may put me completely lost, but i will ask it anyway, i do have one mono camera which is QHY163M, so happy with it, now after managing that guiding and starting to have fun i decided to buy another COOLED camera, but i am into few options here as following:

 

a. Buying same mono camera i have either QHY163M or better ASI1600MM because their filter wheel is better accommodating 1.25" and cheaper, while with QHY163M i have to buy their filter wheel as they have short adapter to make the camera closer to the filter wheel so closer to filters, but i am still not sure if their Standard version of FW is ok for 1.25", and then the back focus, ZWO solved this issue perfectly.

b. Buying a color camera same model of my mono camera, so i use it for RGB and using mono for NB then combine them later

c. Buying a mono camera different than my camera regardless which scope, because i don't have one scope or optics to use, so is it good to have different just in case to match that sampling thing maybe?

d. Buying a color camera different than my camera model, such as 071MC/294MC or 367C[or QHY FF/APS-C] and something like that, i keep seeing nice results from people using color cameras even under bad LP Bortle skies, and i do have a 2" LP filter that maybe it can help slightly

 

 

I did ask on this forum before about using achromatic refractor vs. APO because with using 2 cameras let's say mono i can use each scope or lens for one filter to collect, so definitely i am focusing each perfectly as possible, thus i asked, is it is really necessary for an APO as i will never stop my plan for Tak FSQ so i wanted something very very cheap cheaper than $500 ref scope which won't be a waste after i am getting that Tak FSQ and not selling it.

 

I really really hope to get into this very serious and start to produce nicer results, i wasted almost 2 years before without figuring out the guiding and that alone did ruin most of my imaging really, was a very stupid small silly mistake or fault that it is fixed now and won't make same mistake again at all, so that i am trying to put the best i can and buy few things to make life easier for me or quicker, this astro imaging is never easy, and from Bortle 8/9 sky it is even much more difficult and challenging, and i always read or hear about doing hours and hours of single target, so i have to go with multiple cameras then to save time for collecting data as possible, let's see how do you think about it in that case.

 

Thank you

1.  I suggest using PlateSolve2 manually first, so you can better diagnose problems later.  Most data acquisition suites can use it automatically.

 

2.  Most people stop down lenses a bit, you can improve stars a lot with a small change, maybe 1-2 stops.  But it's simply a personal choice.

 

3.  Getting subexposure better can be useful.  But, where you are now, find something you think works, and increase the number of subs.  That's more important.

 

4.  S(II) signal tends to be low, so the data has more issues.  Again, the cure is more subs.

 

5.  Complicated, never tried it.

 

6.  At your stage, just get whatever cooled camera you like and work with it.  Experience (and cooling <smile>) are more important than fine details.  Get that, work with it, and then decide if you want to change, and how.  Making decisions on limited knowledge or taking other peoples advice is not better than that.

 

More total imaging time (particularly in light pollution) gives better images.  That's just physics, there's no magic way around it.  Faster optics (lower F number) do help, they gather photons faster (hence the label), it's why they're popular.  It's why I got an F2 RASA, although I would _not_ recommend that tricky scope for a beginner.


Edited by bobzeq25, 19 January 2020 - 11:42 AM.


#5 nimitz69

nimitz69

    Surveyor 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 1,758
  • Joined: 21 Apr 2017
  • Loc: A barrier island 18 miles south of Cocoa Beach

Posted 19 January 2020 - 12:07 PM

No value in doing 10 min subs except for narrowband.  With Bortie8/9 skies i’d Expect your swamping read noise with exposures significantly shorter than that.  I can’t see why you’d need to go much over 3-4 min subs.  remember, total integration time trumps everything. Shorter sub are way easier to mange, guide, etc.

 

I don’t generally get serious about processing an image until I have around 8 hrs of time on it and my skies are SQM 19.5. I don’t care how long it takes to get enough data.  I’m not looking to see how many difference targets I can image.  I’m looking to get great results on the targets i do select, this is not a race.

 

I my opinion a lot of imagers spend way too much time obsessing over sub exposure length when they would be off obsessing over how to maximize total time on a target.


  • bobzeq25 likes this

#6 TareqPhoto

TareqPhoto

    Aurora

  • -----
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 4,960
  • Joined: 20 Feb 2017
  • Loc: Ajman - UAE

Posted 19 January 2020 - 03:39 PM

The imaging software that you use will be the main factor here. If you are using SGP, the PlateSolve2 solver works quite well. The biggest thing to be careful with, is to make sure that you set the image scale correctly. If it fails to solve, in most cases that's the problem.
 

I don't generally image through camera lenses, but I understand that stopping them down a bit helps tremendously on stars.

Regarding your question about the importance of stars, that's a pretty subjective thing. In my opinion, stars are an important part of the image, and I spend a good amount of effort to make sure that my processing doesn't negatively affect them.
 

If you are happy with your 10 minute exposures, then you should be good to go. There's not much to gain by going longer than that, with the possible exception of narrow band imaging - and even then, 10 minutes is perfectly fine.

Regarding technical stuff, don't ever let that stop you from imaging! It's great to learn more of the technical stuff, but actually making images is the very best way to get better at this!
 

Most objects are quite dim in SII. You'll probably need much more total exposure time with the SII filter than with the others to get the similar results.
 

In my opinion, a triplet APO is far superior for imaging than anything less. You can get something like an Explore Scientific 80mm F/6 triplet for $850. Add a field flattener to it, and you'll get results similar to what you could expect with an FSQ 106 (unless you have a camera with a huge sensor). Often times in this hobby, you have to pay a huge premium to get that last 20% of performance, and I think that applies here. When you are ready for the FSQ, you can easily sell the Explore Scientific. But until then, you can get great results at a fraction of the cost.
 

I think about this very differently.

 

I generally spend at least two full nights on each target, and often times more.  I'm not sure why you need to save time (for me, at least, this is a leisure activity, so spending more time doing it is a good thing).  You may not be familiar with the climate in the Pacific Northwest, but we have a fairly uncommon situation here.  The Seattle area is located between two mountain ranges, the Olympics to the west, and the Cascades to the east.  Weather moves in from the Pacific Ocean and splits to go around the north and south ends of the Olympics.  It converges in the Seattle area and then runs into the Cascades just to the east.  The result is that we have very few clear nights.  The rain that Seattle is famous for, isn't what most people think of as rain.  It's more of a continuous, misty drizzle.  It's not uncommon to go months between clear nights.

 

Yet even with that kind of challenging weather, I still don't try and cut my imaging time short.  I generally say that astrophotography is an activity for the patient.

 

YMMV.

Ok, i was away so let's start to reply.

 

- Yes, i am using SGPro, so the one integrated in it i should try then, ok, i will try to match that image scale as perfect as i can to make it work nicely, thank you.

 

- I have lenses now, lots of lenses, so i decided i should put them in use, i know scopes are better for something, but until i get a worthy scope rather than my Mak and 8" Newt i think lenses for wide field, already say some very nice results from lenses around even less quality than my lenses, so why not.

 

- Yes, sure, but because i am still learning and practicing and had issues since years so i will always have issues on stars, and that will lead me to post many results and all comments will be about stars, so i will feel like i regret to post anything, or i must stop until i master stars shape perfectly, you go my point, i will definitely work on making stars round shape correctly.

 

- Well, i am happy with whatever even 5min exposure, but it is about that i am just recently started to make imaging good enough so i don't want to jump for very long exposures yet, and i already saw so many images again at shorter exposures as 3-10 minutes just right, my point is about to start having enough good results as much as i can rather than i try to have only one target result for several nights nearly perfect, i feel i will reach that level sooner or later, i just should learn first with shorter exposures as 5-10 minutes until i am good then i go for longer than 10 minutes, i just listen to members here who said if i can go for longer than 10 minutes for signal and noise maybe, indeed i will.

 

- Ok, i will keep imaging, and i will learn about technical stuff time to time, hope to understand it more.

 

- Well, i wasn't talking about SII signal, but i saw there is something already of SII even very weak, but i was talking about the gradient all around or by edges, i saw that much more on SII data than OIII, and i thought that OIII will have that issue more, but who knows, i have to stack and process them then i can judge.

 

- No, that i not a good idea, i have so many items i want to sell and i failed, i couldn't sell any, so i will never buy something for sale later when i know it won't happen, so i better save and wait then, many 80mm APO at market that are very good to start with, and also there are some lenses at 100-120mm range that can do just nice like FSQ, but i know myself, it is that bug of buying high end when possible, i have so many DSLR bodies lying around because in the past i was upgrading a lot, so i ended up with only 2 bodies i am using the most now since year and all the previous one are collecting dust, same mistake i won't do it in astrophotography, i better wait and buy once for lifetime, i can practice with lenses as i mentioned before.

 

- I can't compare my country and weather condition with yours, so plans or what to do is definitely will be different, but i got your point, to go with single camera or do it more and more is good, i know and i agree, but with my other situations in life i feel like i really can't depend on that or keep doing this way, it is not wrong if i can do it with 2 setup or more, some doing it and never regret, it is only a matter of affordable things, and also other thing, having another camera or setup i doesn't mean i must use 2 setup always, i can use 2 setup or i still can go with 1 also, it is just an optional thing, if i am busy or i don't have much time for example i have only 1 night or 2 these days and i know i will be busy or tired or whatever later then i cat cut it a bit, then when i know it will be nice clear for several nights and i have no issues in my life then i can just use one and take my time on it, and definitely in future if i will buy that FSQ then i can't afford second one, and then i can just only use this one for so many nights, but now with lenses i have that luxury of using 2 or more lenses at same FL of both or all, and thus will give me good time saving for one target, and also something you don't know about my country, we are on [or at] the Tropic of Cancer, somehow the day and night are almost equal, just between summer and winter it is not big difference, but the night here are much shorter than North, i was in Scotland once and also in Europe i think Switzerland, i can tell you that the night there is crazy LONG, and this is also limiting us with so many targets, it is very easy that while you setup your gear for 1 hour while the target is low in sky then once you are ready the target is almost high in the sky, so within 2-4 hours the target is gone, and the best zone of the target is when higher in sky which last for nearly 1-2 hours, so imaging how many nights i need to have for example 5-10 hours of single target, and i already mentioned above, i am not good with plate solving yet.

 

Sorry for that last comment very long, but wanted to put it all in one sentence, but i got all your answers, it will help me and i will think better later, hopefully i will learn more than see what i can change or add.

 

Thank you again.



#7 TareqPhoto

TareqPhoto

    Aurora

  • -----
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 4,960
  • Joined: 20 Feb 2017
  • Loc: Ajman - UAE

Posted 19 January 2020 - 03:45 PM

1) Use the integrated plate-solver.  I used ASTAP with NINA, and SGP supports that too with their latest release.

2) 

3) Really no need to go beyond 10 mins, and with your Bortle 8/9 sky, your going to have to shorten those exposures to keep your frames from saturating.

4) 

5) Check out astromechanics.org.  They make ASCOM enabled Canon EF lens controller.

6)

 

Have fun and don’t be so hard on yourself.  We all make mistakes; it’s a big part of AP!

 

GL&CS!

1) Great, i got that from Wade answer, i will give that SGPro a try one day soon, and i will think about testing N.I.N.A for imaging too.

 

3) Ok, i will stuck with 5-10 minutes for now, and if i have fun more i may test longer just for test, and yes, i am in Bortle 8/9, so i will keep my exposures shorter then as you suggested.

 

5) Cool, i will give it a look and see, thanks.

 

It is not only about me becoming hard on myself, it is about the critiques when i post something here, so i feel like no matter what i will do it will never be good, so sometimes i push myself more, and i have to admit that i feel jealous on some members going with high end and expensive gear although they are already expert, because to my thinking, if i am an expert than any gear even cheap can be good, why most experts must upgrade to higher then if that doesn't matter as the skills, but i never get the answer of that anyway, so many opinions about it so i let it go and i try my best, and this forum became kind of an Elite forum for astro imaging.

 

CS for you too and thanks!



#8 johnsoda

johnsoda

    Apollo

  • *****
  • Moderators
  • Posts: 1,264
  • Joined: 30 May 2014
  • Loc: SW Ohio, USA

Posted 19 January 2020 - 03:45 PM

1) Use the integrated plate-solver.  I used ASTAP with NINA, and SGP supports that too with their latest release.

2) 

3) Really no need to go beyond 10 mins, and with your Bortle 8/9 sky, your going to have to shorten those exposures to keep your frames from saturating.

4) 

5) Check out astromechanics.org.  They make ASCOM enabled Canon EF lens controller.

6)

 

Have fun and don’t be so hard on yourself.  We all make mistakes; it’s a big part of AP!

 

GL&CS!

I second the Astromechanics idea.  They make a great little product that enables you to do both autofocus and control aperture, and it’s much simpler and cleaner than the belt and pulley system I used to use for auto focusing lenses.



#9 TareqPhoto

TareqPhoto

    Aurora

  • -----
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 4,960
  • Joined: 20 Feb 2017
  • Loc: Ajman - UAE

Posted 19 January 2020 - 03:59 PM

1.  I suggest using PlateSolve2 manually first, so you can better diagnose problems later.  Most data acquisition suites can use it automatically.

 

2.  Most people stop down lenses a bit, you can improve stars a lot with a small change, maybe 1-2 stops.  But it's simply a personal choice.

 

3.  Getting subexposure better can be useful.  But, where you are now, find something you think works, and increase the number of subs.  That's more important.

 

4.  S(II) signal tends to be low, so the data has more issues.  Again, the cure is more subs.

 

5.  Complicated, never tried it.

 

6.  At your stage, just get whatever cooled camera you like and work with it.  Experience (and cooling <smile>) are more important than fine details.  Get that, work with it, and then decide if you want to change, and how.  Making decisions on limited knowledge or taking other peoples advice is not better than that.

 

More total imaging time (particularly in light pollution) gives better images.  That's just physics, there's no magic way around it.  Faster optics (lower F number) do help, they gather photons faster (hence the label), it's why they're popular.  It's why I got an F2 RASA, although I would _not_ recommend that tricky scope for a beginner.

1. Hmmmmm, i will think about it, why not, but i have to stuck with one anyway, will see.

 

2. I will stop, i bought step down rings to make it better than using internal blades of lenses, someone did that with much better results, i liked the idea.

 

3. In fact that why i was thinking about 5-10min subs, because if i go with 20min or longer i know 1000% that i will end up with very few frames/subs and most likely those subs can have some issues within, so it will be deleted and thus i will end up with short total integration time anyway, while with 5-10 minutes i can get enough many subs to play with, even if i delete some i still have enough frames to stack, i started to enjoy this lately, guiding was definitely important, i really knew that i will waste years without it, so i hope no more wasting now, but i will limit my subexposures too to get better data enough numbers to play with.

 

4. I was talking about gradient itself, because i saw the data of SII, even with single frame i see signal of SII which is nice, and i go enough subs not much but some to give it a try, but i was talking about single frame, i checked out OIII single exposure and SII single exposure, SII got worse gradient itself, on edges i am talking, not the center, i should mention that.

 

5. Never mind, i will figure it out no doubt.

 

6. Still, i value other advises, at least they did their jobs into imaging for years, can't just ignore that, and for now i am so happy with my camera, so i just as simple, same or another one which i am sure i will be happy, to buy same is always a better option because i already know it, and most likely this is what i am going to do really, then later if i can be lucky enough i can try something different, i already completed the cameras collection for planetary so no more plans for that, only DSO cameras is left, having one playing with it did open possibilities really, will see about it too.

 

I won't worry much about that really, i have good enough fast lenses, between F1.4 up to F4.5 as wide open, so i already in good position, i do have Canon 135mm which you know it is F2 lens, and i do have 50mm F1.4 and 85mm F1.8, so fast optics isn't an issue for me, but i know i will have issues using them for stars, and that will give me difficult time about which filters to use, either highspeed ones or something else not sure.

 

I am now practicing about having enough total integration time, slowly slow i will get there, but time to time i am hoping if i can have ready data for a target with shorter integration time such as 2-5 hours at best, i am still doing so let's see, just 2 nights ago i did Rosette with the 3 NB filters, can't wait to process that into Hubble Palette and see.



#10 TareqPhoto

TareqPhoto

    Aurora

  • -----
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 4,960
  • Joined: 20 Feb 2017
  • Loc: Ajman - UAE

Posted 19 January 2020 - 04:04 PM

No value in doing 10 min subs except for narrowband.  With Bortie8/9 skies i’d Expect your swamping read noise with exposures significantly shorter than that.  I can’t see why you’d need to go much over 3-4 min subs.  remember, total integration time trumps everything. Shorter sub are way easier to mange, guide, etc.

 

I don’t generally get serious about processing an image until I have around 8 hrs of time on it and my skies are SQM 19.5. I don’t care how long it takes to get enough data.  I’m not looking to see how many difference targets I can image.  I’m looking to get great results on the targets i do select, this is not a race.

 

I my opinion a lot of imagers spend way too much time obsessing over sub exposure length when they would be off obsessing over how to maximize total time on a target.

My talk about that 5min to 10 min exposure was only about Narrowbanding, not broadband, i am sorry i didn't say that before, i assumed people already know that it was about NB anyway, so i go for long exposures for NB anyway to get something, but at the same time i keep thinking about total integration time too, so i play in between now.

 

That statement will mean that i have to STOP until i get that right condition then, it is not possible with me, it means i may give up sooner or later then, but let's not focus on that, you are lucky to get into Bortle 2-5 if possible, i have to deal with my sky for now and then later decide.

 

You are right, I will take my time, hopefully by the time i will understand many things that will change my way of imaging or getting me improving, i will take my time as i already did since 3 years ago.



#11 TareqPhoto

TareqPhoto

    Aurora

  • -----
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 4,960
  • Joined: 20 Feb 2017
  • Loc: Ajman - UAE

Posted 19 January 2020 - 04:05 PM

I second the Astromechanics idea.  They make a great little product that enables you to do both autofocus and control aperture, and it’s much simpler and cleaner than the belt and pulley system I used to use for auto focusing lenses.

Now that became interesting then, i will definitely give it a look and see, thanks for this link/site.



#12 WadeH237

WadeH237

    Fly Me to the Moon

  • *****
  • Posts: 5,278
  • Joined: 24 Feb 2007
  • Loc: Snohomish, WA

Posted 19 January 2020 - 05:12 PM

- I have lenses now, lots of lenses, so i decided i should put them in use, i know scopes are better for something, but until i get a worthy scope rather than my Mak and 8" Newt i think lenses for wide field, already say some very nice results from lenses around even less quality than my lenses, so why not.

There' nothing "wrong" whatsoever about imaging with camera lenses. Many people have made spectacular deep sky images with them. I don't personally use them, but that has nothing to do with how well they work. There are just so many hours in the night, so I don't have time to try every kind of imaging. Also, I'm a lousy photographer (I have technical knowledge, but no talent for it at all), so I've not invested in decent lenses. I'm perfectly happy with the cheap ones.
 

- Yes, sure, but because i am still learning and practicing and had issues since years so i will always have issues on stars, and that will lead me to post many results and all comments will be about stars, so i will feel like i regret to post anything, or i must stop until i master stars shape perfectly, you go my point, i will definitely work on making stars round shape correctly.

Don't ever worry about asking questions. That's why the forums are here!
 

- Well, i wasn't talking about SII signal, but i saw there is something already of SII even very weak, but i was talking about the gradient all around or by edges, i saw that much more on SII data than OIII, and i thought that OIII will have that issue more, but who knows, i have to stack and process them then i can judge.

Here's the way that it works:

When you have lots of signal, your object is plainly visible about the sky background. When you have a fainter object, with less signal, you have to stretch the image more to see it. When you do that, you are also making the background (along with its gradients) brighter. If you were to stretch all of the channels as much as the SII data, you'd probably find gradients there, too. If you are a light polluted area, gradients are pretty much inevitable.
 

- No, that i not a good idea, i have so many items i want to sell and i failed...

So don't sell it. The point is that for about 20% of the cost of your FSQ, you can be imaging right now with a system that has a similar field. If you still want the FSQ later, then get one. You have that much more experience when the time comes, and you'll be better able to appreciate the FSQ.
 

Sorry for that last comment very long, but wanted to put it all in one sentence, but i got all your answers, it will help me and i will think better later, hopefully i will learn more than see what i can change or add.

Not a problem. I often make long posts to try and get my thoughts across. If people don't want to read them, that's fine with me. I just hope that someone out there gets something out of it.

As for imaging with two systems, I've done it. And for me, it was the exact opposite of fun. Even with my main system pretty much fully automated and hands off, it was one more thing to manage and keep my attention. It turns out that I like to relax and enjoy the sky, sometimes using a visual scope while the imaging stuff is running, sometimes lying on a recliner and enjoying the sky naked eye or with binoculars, and sometimes just napping.

You might be completely different. If you enjoy it, go for it. I wanted to convey that managing two systems is not twice as much work; it's much more than that (kind of like two kids vs. one). There is some fatigue that comes with switching your attention back and forth.

YMMV.

#13 TareqPhoto

TareqPhoto

    Aurora

  • -----
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 4,960
  • Joined: 20 Feb 2017
  • Loc: Ajman - UAE

Posted 19 January 2020 - 06:04 PM

There' nothing "wrong" whatsoever about imaging with camera lenses. Many people have made spectacular deep sky images with them. I don't personally use them, but that has nothing to do with how well they work. There are just so many hours in the night, so I don't have time to try every kind of imaging. Also, I'm a lousy photographer (I have technical knowledge, but no talent for it at all), so I've not invested in decent lenses. I'm perfectly happy with the cheap ones.
 
Don't ever worry about asking questions. That's why the forums are here!
 
Here's the way that it works:

When you have lots of signal, your object is plainly visible about the sky background. When you have a fainter object, with less signal, you have to stretch the image more to see it. When you do that, you are also making the background (along with its gradients) brighter. If you were to stretch all of the channels as much as the SII data, you'd probably find gradients there, too. If you are a light polluted area, gradients are pretty much inevitable.
 
So don't sell it. The point is that for about 20% of the cost of your FSQ, you can be imaging right now with a system that has a similar field. If you still want the FSQ later, then get one. You have that much more experience when the time comes, and you'll be better able to appreciate the FSQ.
 
Not a problem. I often make long posts to try and get my thoughts across. If people don't want to read them, that's fine with me. I just hope that someone out there gets something out of it.

As for imaging with two systems, I've done it. And for me, it was the exact opposite of fun. Even with my main system pretty much fully automated and hands off, it was one more thing to manage and keep my attention. It turns out that I like to relax and enjoy the sky, sometimes using a visual scope while the imaging stuff is running, sometimes lying on a recliner and enjoying the sky naked eye or with binoculars, and sometimes just napping.

You might be completely different. If you enjoy it, go for it. I wanted to convey that managing two systems is not twice as much work; it's much more than that (kind of like two kids vs. one). There is some fatigue that comes with switching your attention back and forth.

YMMV.

ِAll that is part of experience or experimenting until getting enough knowledge, i am good into photography and dealing with multi gear so that isn't like a big deal for me, before i go out i check out my gear in advance, so it is not so difficult for me to check out two systems, actually i am planning to use 2 cameras on 2 lenses putting them on one long bad dovetail, not separated systems, so i am still using one mount and one computer, it is only 2 cameras and 2 lenses [or scopes] that i am dialing with.

 

I was thinking about APO doublet instead because they are much cheaper than triplets, and also i can use that also as a guiding scope later if i get FSQ, so i don't need to sell it, but buying an affordable scope that is almost in same range of FSQ it will not help if i don't/can't sell it, i know about your point to get it now to learn with it now until i am ready for upgrade, but i don't feel like that will be a good idea, i still have ST80, i can use it for mono single filter, say for Ha only, but i will see what i can do, i have some situations in life, if i finish it i may get lucky, i was hoping for something last year so i dreamt big, but it is gone, i am trying again, i keep my expectations always high that sooner or later i may get a budget for something such as TEC or Takahashi and such, i can wait, i do have fun with the lenses, not after that super perfect Magazine/Hubble like results yet, at least i got the fun of knowing how to set things, i don't see it so big difference of learning with lenses than scopes, and i am still having my 8" F5 Newtonian which i bought for imaging too, did collimate it but waiting an adapter, this is much more difficult than APO refr, so this can be my helper to learn then.

 

I really appreciate answers and comments to keep me going, and i try sometimes to go my way, and i also try to go others ways, i put certain things in my head, i searched a lot on the net, here on forums or whatever site, i came almost to conclusion about equipment, i can't afford everything expensive like your equipment, but also i don't have to buy everything cheap and affordable, and i also have that idea about that if i can afford something expensive now even i am still starting then why not, i can always learn with anything, because i know it is a matter of life, if can afford it now then better i do before it became impossible to afford it later in future, many people think if i start with some/few items which are high end mainly a scope or mount then it will be much more difficult to learn, so why, mostly those high end items have best quality to make it better or easier than difficult, while with cheaper if it is not much known it may cause more headache actually.




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






Cloudy Nights LLC
Cloudy Nights Sponsor: Astronomics