Calamities if naturePosted By dan kowall |
Posts Made By: dan kowall
May 12, 2011 03:21 PM
Forum:
CCD Imaging and Processing/Deep Sky
June 6, 2011 03:52 PM
Forum:
Equipment Talk
SBIG ST8300M cameraPosted By dan kowall |
No, it is not.
What you are seeing may just be the readout of a hot pixel.
It's hard to diagnose since you haven't included an image of what you're talking about.
Go to 'Application Notes' at the SBIG site and read 'Column defects and hot pixels'.
dan
What you are seeing may just be the readout of a hot pixel.
It's hard to diagnose since you haven't included an image of what you're talking about.
Go to 'Application Notes' at the SBIG site and read 'Column defects and hot pixels'.
dan
July 3, 2011 05:23 PM
Forum:
CCD Imaging and Processing/Deep Sky
Sh2-119Posted By dan kowall |
How did this one escape my attention?
It seems to be hiding in plain sight.
After searching for other versions, I must commend you for an excellent image, Maciej.
My regards,
dan kowall
It seems to be hiding in plain sight.
After searching for other versions, I must commend you for an excellent image, Maciej.
My regards,
dan kowall
August 1, 2011 04:45 PM
Forum:
CCD Imaging and Processing/Deep Sky
Open Cluster IC 4756 w/ IR dataPosted By dan kowall |
Hi Jim,
It's always interesting to see how are data 'stacks up' with the professional stuff.
You have a good capture and presentation.
dan
It's always interesting to see how are data 'stacks up' with the professional stuff.
You have a good capture and presentation.
dan
August 1, 2011 04:59 PM
Forum:
CCD Imaging and Processing/Deep Sky
Giant Cygnus Mosaic- from America to CrescentPosted By dan kowall |
That's an excellent effort, Maciej.
The large image presents well with no visible seams and similar brightness levels on all of the subexposures.
My only quibble would be that the final image shows a bit dark on my monitor. I brightened up the background and applied a bit of contrast and it looked even better to my eye.
My regards on a fine image,
dan
The large image presents well with no visible seams and similar brightness levels on all of the subexposures.
My only quibble would be that the final image shows a bit dark on my monitor. I brightened up the background and applied a bit of contrast and it looked even better to my eye.
My regards on a fine image,
dan
August 19, 2011 06:38 PM
Forum:
CCD Imaging and Processing/Deep Sky
Kronberger 61Posted By dan kowall |
Excellent work, Roland.
As expected, this shows well in OIII.
My best regards,
dan
As expected, this shows well in OIII.
My best regards,
dan
September 2, 2011 08:15 PM
Forum:
CCD Imaging and Processing/Deep Sky
Another image from LAASPosted By dan kowall |
That's tasty, Floyd.
dan
dan
October 3, 2011 03:24 PM
Forum:
Eyepieces
9mm ES 100/Ethos 10mm ComparoPosted By dan kowall |
Rod Kaufman said:
For purists, 1mm of difference in focal length makes a direct comparison a mute point......
Hi Rod,
It's a rare occasion for me to experience one of the most elegant and pleasurable quirks of language: a malapropism.
It's not a 'moot point' since it's been years since I came across one.
I applaud the complexity of your mind (whether conscious or not) to produce one.
Having said what I wanted to say, I will now stand mute or moot, as the case may be.
My best regards,
dan
October 3, 2011 03:31 PM
Forum:
CCD Imaging and Processing/Deep Sky
My latest imagesPosted By dan kowall |
Your extended exposure time paid off well on The Cave, Floyd.
The subtle blues are not often seen and they make a big difference.
My regards,
dan
The subtle blues are not often seen and they make a big difference.
My regards,
dan
October 12, 2011 04:01 PM
Forum:
CCD Imaging and Processing/Deep Sky
Adobe CS5 ExtendedPosted By dan kowall |
Hi Floyd and Jim,
As I'm sure you've seen from the Adobe site, the changes from CS2 to CS5 aren't dramatic for astrophotographers.
The smart filters are enhanced, but you can do the same stuff in CS2 as in CS5, it just takes a few more mouse clicks.
If your computer can take advantage of the 64 bit capability, CS5 is supposed to work faster.
If you're into making movies, CS5 Extended is the horse that you want to ride. The 3D modeling capabilities are a hoot. I don't have experience with other movie programs, but it's easy to learn the basics with CS5.
I would think that most astrophotographers wouldn't see much benefit in upgrading unless they needed the movie capabilities.
dan kowall
As I'm sure you've seen from the Adobe site, the changes from CS2 to CS5 aren't dramatic for astrophotographers.
The smart filters are enhanced, but you can do the same stuff in CS2 as in CS5, it just takes a few more mouse clicks.
If your computer can take advantage of the 64 bit capability, CS5 is supposed to work faster.
If you're into making movies, CS5 Extended is the horse that you want to ride. The 3D modeling capabilities are a hoot. I don't have experience with other movie programs, but it's easy to learn the basics with CS5.
I would think that most astrophotographers wouldn't see much benefit in upgrading unless they needed the movie capabilities.
dan kowall
Funding Member
