M81 Bodes Galaxy: I took this last Tuesday before the AVX mount went crazy. I also used the 8 inch SCT. Although I took 70 plus subs, all but 36 were trashed due to clouds and planes.

nikonshooter Loc: Spartanburg, South Carolina

I took this last Tuesday before the AVX mount went crazy. I also used the 8 inch SCT.
Although I took 70 plus subs, all but 36 were trashed due to clouds and planes. Some of the subs used were cloudy in parts but I tried to keep the ones that had some detail in the galaxy.
All in all not enough signal so detail is pitiful but I had fun trying.
I used PixInsight for the heavy lifting an PSCC for luminosity masking in selective colors and structure what little it has.

M81 Bodes Galaxy

(Download)

JimH123 Loc: Morgan Hill, CA

Very Nice! Even with the challenging conditions, you still made it look fabulous!

nikonshooter Loc: Spartanburg, South Carolina

JimH123 wrote:

Very Nice! Even with the challenging conditions, you still made it look fabulous!

Thanks but you are being kind. it is far short of fabulous. As soon as I can, I will get more subs and see if I can get a better more detailed galaxy. The one thing I have discovered is you can not have enough subs. I would like to get 10 hours or more of 2 minute images with the DSLR.

Albuqshutterbug Loc: Albuquerque NM

nikonshooter wrote:

Thanks but you are being kind. it is far short of fabulous.

You're right. Its only outstanding! I will eventually get that amount of detail. Maybe only as I pass it on my way outbound when I croak, but I will eventually get there. ;) Really nicely done Ed.

JimH123 Loc: Morgan Hill, CA

nikonshooter wrote:

Thanks but you are being kind...it is far short of fabulous. As soon as I can....I will get more subs and see if I can get a better more detailed galaxy. The one thing I have discovered is you can not have enough subs. I would like to get 10 hours or more of 2 minute images with the DSLR.

Look's like it is not going to take long to wear out the shutter mechanism. A couple hundred subs, some flats, some darks, etc = a lot of shutter activations!

I have been wondering about cameras that now have silent shutter. Several recent Sony models have it now. The shutter is not activated at all and the exposure is taken electronically. With this, one could rack up countless exposures and never wear out the shutter mechanism at all. Not too much said about this online yet. And from what I have found, it seems this method, by Sony, is using 12 bits, not 14 bits for the RAW images. Of course, a CCD camera doesn't have this issue at all and also saves in 16 bits.

CraigFair Loc: Santa Maria, CA.

I agree with others it is outstanding Ed.
PixInsight is a heavy lifter alright.

JimH123 Loc: Morgan Hill, CA

I like your results better than mine. I imaged Bode's Nebula (really Galaxy), but since it was named before they knew there were other galaxies, the name Nebula was used.

I have done only 6 images, 30 sec each at ISO 1600 using the 8" Orion Astrograph which is f/3.9. I am finding that the central portion is completely blown out and I need more detail in the arms. This one would do best with several stacks and to overlay in Photoshop and take the best from the center and the best from the edges.

Bode's Nebula

(Download)

nikonshooter Loc: Spartanburg, South Carolina

JimH123 wrote:

I like your results better than mine. I imaged Bo... (show quote)

That's the ticket. we both need to add another 50 plus subs. 100 would be a good number. WOW with f/3.9 you can click off 200 plus subs in no time. With my f/10 SCT, I am stuck at 120 seconds at min., and now i have to guide and dither so 70 pictures in 3 hours is my challenge. I have to take images over multiple nights to get what I need. I have learned it is a waste of time to try to get a good image on less.

I would keep the ISO at 1600 and take 50, 10 second exposures and 200, 30 second exposures. I don't think there will be too much detail in the core anyway. Process each set differently and use a HDR software program like Photomatrix or NIK HDR to combine the files. This works sooo much better than PS.

JimH123 Loc: Morgan Hill, CA

nikonshooter wrote:

That's the ticket..... we both need to add anothe... (show quote)

Sounds like good advice. Yes, the F3.9 really works well for extended objects and I do think I need two stacks as you say. The 30 sec shots were just totally saturating the center.
Do you have a focal reducer for your F10? My 9.25" F10 with a FL of 2350mm becomes 1500mm at F6.4 with a 0.63X Focal Reducer.
And perhaps I should start dreaming about going hyperstar. That 9.25" becomes a 540mm FL at F2.3 with the hyperstar attachment!

nikonshooter Loc: Spartanburg, South Carolina

JimH123 wrote:

Sounds like good advice. Yes, the F3.9 really works well for extended objects and I do think I need two stacks as you say. The 30 sec shots were just totally saturating the center.
Do you have a focal reducer for your F10? My 9.25" F10 with a FL of 2350mm becomes 1500mm at F6.4 with a 0.63X Focal Reducer.
And perhaps I should start dreaming about going hyperstar. That 9.25" becomes a 540mm FL at F2.3 with the hyperstar attachment!

Yessir, I have a .63 Focal Reducer and field flatener, but I feel I need the reach of the 2033 mm SCT when imaging M81 or M82.
I think I will take your advice and use it though. With the D810a or D800e the file sizes give me pretty decent crops (37megapixel) with enough pixels left to produce an 1800 pixel web image at the longest edge.
You are spot on...it is more about aperture than focal length.

CraigFair Loc: Santa Maria, CA.

JimH123 wrote:

I like your results better than mine. I imaged Bo... (show quote)

Really nice job Jim H.

Oknoder Loc: Western North Dakota

I really like your color in your image much nicer than mine.

Matthew