Advice on first eff...
 
Share:
Notifications
Clear all

15th Feb 2024: Astro Pixel Processor 2.0.0-beta29 released - macOS native File Chooser, macOS CMD-Q fixed, read-only Fits on network fixed and other bug fixes

7th December 2023:  added payment option Alipay to purchase Astro Pixel Processor from China, Hong Kong, Macau, Taiwan, Korea, Japan and other countries where Alipay is used.

 

Advice on first efforts

8 Posts
4 Users
0 Likes
1,768 Views
(@edwallace)
Main Sequence Star
Joined: 3 years ago
Posts: 30
Topic starter  

After wrestling and struggling to image dso's with my ASI 290mm (planetary camera) and tiny fov, I finally got a cooled dso camera, the 1600mm pro. What a difference! I'm attaching my first effort (M81). I know I have a long way to go, but would appreciate some advice. My subs were all properly calibrated with darks only. I have not ventured into flats yet, but I will very soon. I suspect that is part of the problem with this image. The setup is Celestron Nexstar 8se, CGEM II mount, ASI 1600mm, 6.3 focal reducer, EFW and EAF.  ASI 120mm guide camera.

What has caused the milky halo here? Regardless, I am thrilled with the results for my first try with my new camera. I also got a bunch of good data on M101 last night, which I have not processed yet. This image is 15 60sec subs each in LRGB, and 10 5min subs in Ha.

M81 3.22.21 full jpeg

 


   
ReplyQuote
(@wvreeven)
Quasar
Joined: 6 years ago
Posts: 2133
 

@edwallace Ed, does the halo also show up on the lights when you stretch them a lot? Or perhaps in the darks and/or master dark? I occasionally still use an ASI1600MM as well and have been using it in the part two years and have not seen such a prominent halo.


   
ReplyQuote
(@rickwayne)
Neutron Star
Joined: 5 years ago
Posts: 70
 

Yeah, that would be really, really weird vignetting.


   
ReplyQuote
(@edwallace)
Main Sequence Star
Joined: 3 years ago
Posts: 30
Topic starter  

@wvreeven Attaching one L frame with 2 different amounts of stretching.

 

Screen Shot 2021 03 23 at 12.03.15 AM

 

 

Screen Shot 2021 03 23 at 12.01.38 AM

 


   
ReplyQuote
(@wvreeven)
Quasar
Joined: 6 years ago
Posts: 2133
 

@edwallace OK this clearly shows that the ring is present in the lights. You'll need flats to correct for that.


   
ReplyQuote
(@edwallace)
Main Sequence Star
Joined: 3 years ago
Posts: 30
Topic starter  

@wvreeven That confirms my suspicions. We've just begun a run of many cloudy nights here, so I will take flats soon. Thank you for the info. 


   
ReplyQuote
(@edwallace)
Main Sequence Star
Joined: 3 years ago
Posts: 30
Topic starter  

@wvreeven I spent most of today, off and on, working on this. I took flats and darkflats to calibrate them. In the end, the artifact is still in the image, but it is greatly reduced. This was my first attempt at using flats. I suspect I need better flats - maybe a better light source (I used a white screen on a tv). Still, it is progress.

M81 3.22.21 2 jpeg

 

This post was modified 3 years ago by Ed Wallace

   
ReplyQuote
(@vincent-mod)
Universe Admin
Joined: 7 years ago
Posts: 5707
 

Not sure if that would be the issue, but a TV might put out a different spectrum from what you want in a flat (broadband), people sometimes also have issues using a tablet for instance. The ring seems optical though, but may be worth trying a different light source like a sky flat or an actual flat-box.


   
ReplyQuote
Share: