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 galaxies from Bortle 6 suburb, which filter/software?

  • Please log in to reply
6 replies to this topic

#1 Tulloch

Tulloch

    Mercury-Atlas

  • *****
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 2,544
  • Joined: 02 Mar 2019
  • Loc: Melbourne, Australia

Posted 03 March 2021 - 12:30 AM

Hi there, I'd like to try imaging some galaxies from my backyard in the suburbs (Bortle 6). One of my main issues is trying to work out the best light pollution filter to use (if any) and which software to use. I've done some reading and it appears that the filter most often recommended is the Optolong L-Pro filter for this task, however I have seen another recommendation to use an IR-pass filter like the Astronomik ProPlanet 642 which reportedly almost eliminates the light pollution but still lets the IR from the galaxy through. Others recommend no filter, and use software like Astro Pixel Processor or PixInsight to remove the light pollution.

 

Your thoughts appreciated, thanks.

 

Andrew

 



#2 jonnybravo0311

jonnybravo0311

    Apollo

  • *****
  • Posts: 1,439
  • Joined: 05 Nov 2020
  • Loc: NJ, US

Posted 03 March 2021 - 12:36 AM

No filter. Lots of integration time. Example:
 
med_gallery_347158_15698_1913171.jpg
 
That's about 7.5 hours of data taken from my own Bortle 6 home. I'm still collecting data and hope to have somewhere around 20 hours (assuming it doesn't turn my laptop into mush tongue2.gif )
 
Edit:
 
Here's the link to the Astrobin version that has all the details (click the thumbnail picture):
 
get.jpg?insecure


Edited by jonnybravo0311, 03 March 2021 - 12:38 AM.

  • F.Meiresonne, cybermayberry, Ron (Lubbock) and 1 other like this

#3 Ken Sturrock

Ken Sturrock

    Cardinal Ximenez

  • *****
  • Administrators
  • Posts: 9,941
  • Joined: 26 Sep 2009
  • Loc: Denver, CO

Posted 03 March 2021 - 01:02 AM

Right. I image galaxies LRGB (with a little narrow band) from Bortle 8+ skies. My work is *not* brilliant but it's still satisfying to me. Light pollution filters might be useful but I don't bother with them anymore, especially with the increasing popularity of broad-spectrum LEDs. Rather, like JB, I'd advocate for as much time as you can stand to pour into it and gradient removal algorithms (I use PixInsight).
 

get.jpg?insecure get.jpg?insecure get.jpg?insecure

 

It's unlikely that you'll get the quality of truly dark skies from an urban location, but you may be pleasantly surprised by what you can do. In truth, I'm both personally and professionally pretty busy. If it weren't for urban imaging, I'd never bother at this point in my life.


  • Tulloch likes this

#4 bjulihn

bjulihn

    Ranger 4

  • *****
  • Posts: 327
  • Joined: 19 Jan 2019
  • Loc: Langley, BC. Canada

Posted 03 March 2021 - 01:25 AM

I'm in Bortle 6-7 skies at home. For galaxies, I leave the filters out. While my post-processing skills have improved a lot in the last year, the difference between my 3 hour integration last year of M81-M82 and my 6 hour integration of them this year is to me almost breath-taking. Marked it on my "Lessons Learned" List!


  • Tulloch likes this

#5 bobzeq25

bobzeq25

    ISS

  • *****
  • Posts: 23,944
  • Joined: 27 Oct 2014

Posted 03 March 2021 - 01:39 AM

Joining the chorus.  No filter, they cut out too much signal on broadband targets like galaxies, and distort color.

 

Total imaging time is crucial.

 

Software that includes a good gradient reduction tool.  I recommend Astro Pixel Processor.  PixInsight and StarTools are other possibilities, there are more, but I think those three do gradient reduction really well.

 

LRGB and a mono camera is best, but expensive.  One shot color can work.  Below is M31 from Bortle 7, using a lowly DSLR.

 

M31 SV70T small.jpg


Edited by bobzeq25, 03 March 2021 - 10:43 AM.

  • Ron (Lubbock), Tulloch and rj144 like this

#6 F.Meiresonne

F.Meiresonne

    Fly Me to the Moon

  • *****
  • Posts: 7,047
  • Joined: 22 Dec 2003
  • Loc: Eeklo,Belgium

Posted 03 March 2021 - 01:54 AM

No filter. Lots of integration time. Example:
 
med_gallery_347158_15698_1913171.jpg
 
That's about 7.5 hours of data taken from my own Bortle 6 home. I'm still collecting data and hope to have somewhere around 20 hours (assuming it doesn't turn my laptop into mush tongue2.gif )
 
Edit:
 
Here's the link to the Astrobin version that has all the details (click the thumbnail picture):
 
get.jpg?insecure

By default integretion time should help i know this , allthough in my last attempts on Rosetta adding 1 or 2 hours did not add much detail. Their is definately an approvement  from 90 minutes to allmost 3 hours but it is on the modest side i think...



#7 Tulloch

Tulloch

    Mercury-Atlas

  • *****
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 2,544
  • Joined: 02 Mar 2019
  • Loc: Melbourne, Australia

Posted 03 March 2021 - 03:25 PM

Thanks all for your responses, looks like no filter it is!

 

Probably better to put my money towards the processing software rather than a new filter :)

 

Andrew




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