|
 |
budguinn
Founding Member Platinum Level
Gallery: Latest Photos
Registered: Aug 2003
Location: Gold Beach, Oregon
Posts: 394
|
The Running Man...NGC1977
This is a really slick looking little nebula in the Orion complex of nebulas.
It's called the running man for the obvious reason of the dark dust clouds that look like a man running.
This was taken last night...3.12.04...the seeing was poor because of very high moisture.
Telescope: Televue NP101
Camera: SXV-H9C
20pics@4min Processed in AstroArt3 and PS
I added the little diffraction spikes
thanks for looking and commenting
__________________
warmest regards,
Bud Guinn
Nikon 5700
http://www.budguinn.com
Last edited by budguinn on Mar 13th, 2004 at 07:49 PM
Report this to a moderator | IP: Logged
|
Mar 13th, 2004 06:58 PM |
|
|
| |
|
1969
Senior Member
Gallery: Latest Photos
Registered: Feb 2004
Location: Kent England
Posts: 157
|
Just checked out that scope you are using, very nice you obviously take your astronomy seriously.
Nice work
Report this to a moderator | IP: Logged
|
|
Mar 14th, 2004 01:18 AM |
|
|
| |
|
me_wrestler
Founding Member Platinum Level
Gallery: Latest Photos
Registered: Aug 2003
Location: Las Vegas, Nevada
Posts: 359
|
Your stuff never ceases to amaze me. Can you tell me the advantage of taking multiple photos and putting them together to make one over taking one long exposure.
Colin
Report this to a moderator | IP: Logged
|
|
Mar 14th, 2004 05:35 AM |
|
|
| |
|
BritishBeef
Senior Member
Gallery: Latest Photos
Registered: Nov 2003
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 105
|
Now that's a great one Bud! Good work.
Regards,
Geoff.
__________________
http://www.pbase.com/britishbeef
Canon EOS 10D
Report this to a moderator | IP: Logged
|
|
Mar 14th, 2004 11:58 AM |
|
|
| |
|
budguinn
Founding Member Platinum Level
Gallery: Latest Photos
Registered: Aug 2003
Location: Gold Beach, Oregon
Posts: 394
|
quote:
Originally posted by me_wrestler
Your stuff never ceases to amaze me. Can you tell me the advantage of taking multiple photos and putting them together to make one over taking one long exposure.
Colin
Colin, that is an excellent question.
There are many reasons, and I'll try to list them in order.
1. Signal to Noise Ratio.
An hour single exposure is approximately equal to a total of twenty three min exposures, stacked...for the same hour of exposure time. In the single exposure all of the signal and the NOISE is collected at one time. When stacking multiple exposures the effect is that the signal, which is constant, increases. But, and this is the important part, the noise, which is random, cancels itself out. So, the stacking increases the Signal and decreases the noise. It is the S/N ratio that gives a sharp..clear...clean looking picture.
2. Tracking error.
It is much easier to get a mount to tack consistently for 3 minutes than it is for 60 minutes. My mount is very good at tracking, but other things crop up that can cause a tracking error...such as:
Many of the things that contribute to tracking error will show up on only one or two of the 20 pics from the example above. A slight wind will show as a blur. With the one hour shot...we have a blurred picture or star trails. With the stacked version...we throw away the bad frame.
The same is true if a cloud happens to cross the telescope....one hour shot is lost. But, with the stacked set we can simply remove the bad frames.
3. Nasty little white trails
Satellites, Meteors, air planes and other UFO's. I have a real nice...and growing...folder of images that have trails through them. The hour exposure, from a purist viewpoint, is ruined. With the stacked set we simply remove the offending frame. I may make an album on my web-site of just objects with these satelites and other trails.
These are the major reasons for the multiple shots. It would be easier to set the scope for an hour shot, but in my experience it would have a track of some kind and the S/N would not be nearly as good as the Multiple exposures.
I hope this is helpful,
bud
__________________
warmest regards,
Bud Guinn
Nikon 5700
http://www.budguinn.com
Report this to a moderator | IP: Logged
|
|
Mar 14th, 2004 05:52 PM |
|
|
| |
|
raaf
Member
Gallery: Latest Photos
Registered: Nov 2003
Location: Netherlands
Posts: 355
|
As always again a great shot Bud.
One more question about stacked pictures, if I am correct, you make about 20 shots of the same subject and add all these pictures together to make one final photo?. Are you using PS or do you use other software for this?
Report this to a moderator | IP: Logged
|
|
Mar 14th, 2004 07:20 PM |
|
|
| |
|
budguinn
Founding Member Platinum Level
Gallery: Latest Photos
Registered: Aug 2003
Location: Gold Beach, Oregon
Posts: 394
|
quote:
Originally posted by raaf
As always again a great shot Bud.
One more question about stacked pictures, if I am correct, you make about 20 shots of the same subject and add all these pictures together to make one final photo?. Are you using PS or do you use other software for this?
Raaf,
You've got it exactly right. I set the software, which controls the guiding of the scope and the camera and second guide camera, to take about 25 shots....usually between 3 and 7 minute exposures. The software then has the ability to stack the pics. The pics are first separated into four parts......Luminance, Red, Green, and Blue channels....then they are stacked for each channel.....some routines are followed so that color balance is correct and then the luminance channel is sharpened and adjusted (this channel has all of the fine detail in it)......then you combine the RGB channels...adjust and then add the Luminance channel. I then take the whole thing to PS to clone out any hot pixels, or to enhance parts of the picture.
It is a bit envolved. I have tended to start taking more short duration shots, simply because some are usually ruined by the meteors/satellites and I'd rather lose a 3min shot than an 8min shot.....I still try to get the same amount of "time" on the object.
The software that I use is called AstroArt 3.0...here is a link to their site...just to see what it looks like:
http://www.msb-astroart.com/
The reason for the 25 pics is that there is usually one or two that have some sort of problem in them. I have found that you need at least an hour or more of image time for deep space stuff....and usually it's more that is required.
I'm just breaking the surface in learning to process the images...I've bought a book on it and am slowly working my through.
bud
__________________
warmest regards,
Bud Guinn
Nikon 5700
http://www.budguinn.com
Report this to a moderator | IP: Logged
|
|
Mar 15th, 2004 12:28 AM |
|
|
| |
|
me_wrestler
Founding Member Platinum Level
Gallery: Latest Photos
Registered: Aug 2003
Location: Las Vegas, Nevada
Posts: 359
|
Bud,
Thanks for the fantastic explanation. I have a daughter that is very interested in this topic and she sits and stares at your pics for long periods of time. She doesn't have very good equiptment yet but it is slowly getting better. She and I appreciate your stuff.
Colin
Report this to a moderator | IP: Logged
|
|
Mar 15th, 2004 06:36 AM |
|
|
| |
|
raaf
Member
Gallery: Latest Photos
Registered: Nov 2003
Location: Netherlands
Posts: 355
|
Thanks Bud for your explanation. It's a very interesting hobby. Unfortunately, I live in a crowded area with a lot of disturbing light at night and many, many clouds.
Hope you'll be posting a lot of these fantastic images.
Ron Raaf
Report this to a moderator | IP: Logged
|
|
Mar 15th, 2004 10:10 PM |
|
|
| |
|
| The time now is 09:17 PM [GMT] |
 |
|
 |
|
|
| |
 Canon Cameras Nikon Cameras Olympus Cameras Sony Cameras Kodak Cameras Pentax Cameras
Minolta Konica
Fujifilm Finepix Cameras Panasonic Cameras Other digital cameras Forums
All comments, critiques and images are property of their posters. Company and product names may be trademarks of their respective owners. Powered by vBulletin and vbPortal.
Copyright BytePhoto.com 2003-2008 - Digital camera reviews, digital photography news, digital camera forums and free online photo sharing album gallery.
Site Map
Monitor Calibration
|
