The CrabPosted By dan kowall |
Your color looks good on this one, Louie.
dan
dan
Posts Made By: dan kowall
December 22, 2006 02:57 PM
Forum:
CCD Imaging and Processing/Deep Sky
December 24, 2006 02:11 PM
Forum:
CCD Imaging and Processing/Deep Sky
Widefield Scope QuestionPosted By dan kowall |
Hi Ivan,
There are a few general considerations:
---The lower focal ratio scope will, of course, have a much smaller critical focus zone. Focusing with this scope needs to be precisely done, there's no room for error.
---Back focus will be less with the smaller f ratio. This will restrict what components you can hang on this scope.
---The central obstruction will reduce contrast somewhat.
---The image circle on the FSQ is twice as large.
A specific consideration to the Tak Epsilons would be concern that the focuser can take the weight of whatever you're going to hang on it. If I remember correctly, some of the Epsilons were a little weak in this regard.
A lot of people say that they have quite a bit of fun imaging with the Epsilon.
The next generation FSQ will be coming out shortly. Who knows how this will impact this comparison.
dan kowall
photonhunter.com
There are a few general considerations:
---The lower focal ratio scope will, of course, have a much smaller critical focus zone. Focusing with this scope needs to be precisely done, there's no room for error.
---Back focus will be less with the smaller f ratio. This will restrict what components you can hang on this scope.
---The central obstruction will reduce contrast somewhat.
---The image circle on the FSQ is twice as large.
A specific consideration to the Tak Epsilons would be concern that the focuser can take the weight of whatever you're going to hang on it. If I remember correctly, some of the Epsilons were a little weak in this regard.
A lot of people say that they have quite a bit of fun imaging with the Epsilon.
The next generation FSQ will be coming out shortly. Who knows how this will impact this comparison.
dan kowall
photonhunter.com
December 27, 2006 03:16 PM
Forum:
CCD Imaging and Processing/Deep Sky
M 1Posted By dan kowall |
Most people don't get any of the blue haze, Dietmar.
That's a fine image.
dan kowall
That's a fine image.
dan kowall
December 31, 2006 01:33 AM
Forum:
CCD Imaging and Processing/Deep Sky
IC 410 The Tadpole nebulaPosted By dan kowall |
Well done, David. It looks like you've got your system working well.
You do have more data hiding in your image. A low end stretch brought it out (see attached image).
Keep up the good work.
dan kowall
You do have more data hiding in your image. A low end stretch brought it out (see attached image).
Keep up the good work.
dan kowall
January 3, 2007 03:04 PM
Forum:
CCD Imaging and Processing/Deep Sky
Sharpless 254 through 258Posted By dan kowall |
Hi Jim,
That's really well done. The field of view is perfect. I've been trying to collect enough data on IC 2162 for a couple of years, but I can see from your image that this field of view with all five Sharpless objects is much more interesting.
My regards,
dan
That's really well done. The field of view is perfect. I've been trying to collect enough data on IC 2162 for a couple of years, but I can see from your image that this field of view with all five Sharpless objects is much more interesting.
My regards,
dan
January 8, 2007 06:49 PM
Forum:
CCD Imaging and Processing/Deep Sky
NGC 2174 - HA RGBPosted By dan kowall |
That's a wonderful version of this nebula, Jim.
Well done.
dan
Well done.
dan
January 19, 2007 03:28 PM
Forum:
CCD Imaging and Processing/Deep Sky
Cone NebulaPosted By dan kowall |
Since you asked....Jason Boyce said:
.....What do you think?Does it look OK?
Acquisition looks to be good, Jason, but the processing is a little harsh to my eyes.
I would back off on the sharpening so that the stars don't have such a hard edge.
As an example, Bernhard Hubl has a master's touch when it comes to processing stars. Look under 'Star Clusters' on his site:
http://hubble.heim.at/
Here's one that's simple, natural, and stunningly beautiful (to my eyes, anyway):
http://hubble.heim.at/images/stephenson1-1_full.jpg
I think that one of the hardest things in processing is getting the stars to look natural. It's certainly a skill that I haven't mastered.
My regards,
dan kowall
January 22, 2007 04:14 PM
Forum:
CCD Imaging and Processing/Deep Sky
Hickson 44Posted By dan kowall |
Thanks for the comments, guys.
I replaced the image on my site with one that doesn't have the slight magenta cast that the original did.
dan
I replaced the image on my site with one that doesn't have the slight magenta cast that the original did.
dan
January 23, 2007 07:36 PM
Forum:
CCD Imaging and Processing/Deep Sky
Head of the JellyfishPosted By dan kowall |
Well done, Jim.
A lot of people saturate the top of the 'head' of the Jellyfish, but you didn't.
I would have thought that 90 second subs for the RGB would be too short, but the color looks good on your image.
I especially like the subtle color shadings. Did that come just from the RGB data or did you blend some of the Ha data into the blue channel?
dan
A lot of people saturate the top of the 'head' of the Jellyfish, but you didn't.
I would have thought that 90 second subs for the RGB would be too short, but the color looks good on your image.
I especially like the subtle color shadings. Did that come just from the RGB data or did you blend some of the Ha data into the blue channel?
dan
January 28, 2007 02:56 PM
Forum:
CCD Imaging and Processing/Deep Sky
NGC 2403 - 16" RCOSPosted By dan kowall |
It must be nice to use a 16" RCOS and an ME without having to buy them!
The galaxy looks pretty good, Dietmar.
dan
The galaxy looks pretty good, Dietmar.
dan
Funding Member
