M31 - Andromeda shots?

[Jason Rickerby]

Hmm, there doesn't seem to be a thread of Andromeda shots. How about we start one? :-)

http://www.pbase.com/jmrickerby/image/85070289/large.jpg

9 x 3 Minutes @ ISO 400
Canon 20D, SkyWatcher Equinox 80mm, Losmandy GM-8 Gemini

[Johnny9s]

Great shot Jason. I have the exact same scope and haven't had a chance to really use it yet. Do you have other pics taken through the same scope?

John

[Nighthound]

Well done, especially at 27 minutes. Did you do any post process stretching in Photoshop or in your stacking software? If so be careful with your black point, you likely lost some faint detail along the outer edge by "clipping". Clipping is evident when the black point on your histogram is positioned all the way to the left. Not trying to be too critical, I just know from experience. :D I used to do the same thing and discovered that I was tossing a lot of subtle detail. By keeping the histogram up on screen while processing it's easy to avoid stretching too far an the low end.

[Johnny9s]

Did you do any post process stretching in Photoshop or in your stacking software?

What exactly is stretching? I have seen that term so much but I am not really sure what it is.

[Nighthound]

What exactly is stretching? I have seen that term so much but I am not really sure what it is.

Stretching is adjusting curves or levels(I rarely, if ever use) of an image to reveal detail and/or contrast, or basically coax out the good stuff. An image that is stacked and not stretched will pale in comparison to one that is. It takes some finesse and careful attention to color balance, black point, and noise level and is best approached very light handed. It's easier to increase adjustment than it is undo pushing the image too far(thank goodness for the history palette in PS). All the processing in the world won't produce signal that's not there or improve the quality of the data gathered. And on the other hand, the best data and signal won't be optimized by poor processing. Noel's Astro Tools(PS actions) used properly through the process help greatly with results. It'll all come with practice and certainly having some PS experience helps a lot.

[Jason Rickerby]

I used a piece of software called DeepSkyStacker ( http://deepskystacker.free.fr/english/index.html (http://deepskystacker.free.fr/english/index.html) ) to stack and align the images. I then did some adjustments in Lightroom. Because the galaxy is relatively faint, even with the stacked exposures, it's challenging to pull the faint details out of the noise.

[Celestron]

Very nice Jason !

[Jason Rickerby]

Great shot Jason. I have the exact same scope and haven't had a chance to really use it yet. Do you have other pics taken through the same scope?

John

To be honest I don't get much opportunity to do astrophotography. Where I live it rains 8+ months of the year.

Here's all my Canon 20D astrophotos, with either a Canon EF 70-200mm F4 L, SkyWatcher Equinox 80mm, or Celestron C8.
http://www.pbase.com/jmrickerby/astro20d

http://www.pbase.com/jmrickerby/image/85074299/large.jpg

[troypiggo]

Excellent results. Especially impressed seeing camera lens used on that last one.

[RadAL]

that galaxy will crash into us in a million or so years.

[Jason Rickerby]

that galaxy will crash into us in a million or so years.

Actually the earliest that this mash up may occur is at least 3 billion years away. The two galaxies may not even "collide" on the first go round, but they will eventually get together.

[Johnny9s]

Here is my first attempt at imaging Andromeda. 18x60sec unguided 500mm Equinox 80ED stacked in DSS and processed in CS3 with Noels actions.
I definitely need to get a focal reducer/field flatener.

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3239/2894855314_79af23e154_o.jpg

John

[bowtie`]

Great images Jason and Johnny! Everyone can laugh at me for this effort. It was taken last night and is the best I can do with a single image and only 24mm of lens. I know it is tacky but I put a red box around it so you can see it as it is rather faint but it sure is a visible *smudge* that stands out.

Camera 5D, ISO 1600, TV 74 sec., AV 5.0, Lens 24-70mm @ 24mm

[Nighthound]

That's a beautiful shot bowtie. M31 is easily visible.

[Oneslowz28]

Outstanding image Jason. The detail and sharpness of the dark lanes is remarkable. This is hands down the most astounding images of M31 taken from earth that I have ever seen. I had to go check the galleries over on CN to make sure and I am 100% positive that this is one of if not the best images of M31 out there.

[Johnny9s]

This is just a rework of my earlier M31. Trying to figure out this whole post processing thing.

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3002/2909289764_703e8a2c26_o.jpg

John

[Celestron]

John , i still like your first one best . Also you need to rotate it 180-degs . The Longer small galaxie should be on the bottom right side (http://www.astropix.com/HTML/SHOW_DIG/027.HTM) .

[Nighthound]

Thought I would try and keep this thread going since M31 is such a popular object. I tinkered with the processing to boost brightness and color, here's what I came up with.

Takahashi Sky 90 II / Losmandy G-11(w Gemini) / Canon 20D

http://i3.photobucket.com/albums/y67/Nighthd/PS%20Gallery/andromedaxcg3.jpg

[Celestron]

Very nice Steve ! There is still a little aqua blue around the bottom edge of M31 , other than that very nice !

[Nighthound]

Thanks Ron. I was using Robert Gendler's 2005 M31 mosaic as a color guide. I pushed the blue a bit in the faint regions of the exterior, maybe a bit much. Still for a 90mm/407 FL shot, I'm fairly happy with it. Still lots of room for improvement fortunately. :D I'd hate to think there was no reason to keep shooting it.

[Adrena1in]

Jeez Johnny, you're getting great results already...I'm so envious.

I've tried M31 a few times, but my latest attempt was the only one I've felt happy about posting. This was only 13 minutes worth though, with my cheapo 400mm Orion ST80...I've sorted my alignment out and should be able to go much "deeper" next time, hopefully with my slightly better 600mm.

http://img501.imageshack.us/img501/2601/andromedajpgspp2td6.th.jpg (http://img501.imageshack.us/my.php?image=andromedajpgspp2td6.jpg)

I'll also try it again soon with my Light-Pollution and/or Fringe Killer filters...see what results I get.

[disc_lover]

it's a beautiful shot you have Jason !

[Adrena1in]

John , i still like your first one best . Also you need to rotate it 180-degs . The Longer small galaxie should be on the bottom right side (http://www.astropix.com/HTML/SHOW_DIG/027.HTM) .

I disagree. Johnny's and my M31 shots are "as is"...that's how it appears with the camera upright. ;)

[David Ransley]

Bowtie, I like your attempt. One question - seeing that you lack the lens capacity that Jason has: How did you tarck for TV 74 sec?

[Ryan.]

Wow, that is an AMAZING shot!
Nice job.

[bowtie`]

Bowtie, I like your attempt. One question - seeing that you lack the lens capacity that Jason has: How did you tarck for TV 74 sec?

That is an unguided image. Shot using a regular Bogen tripod. No tracking involved. I am guessing that at 24mm the errors are beneath visual acuity especially when reduced in size like this web-version is.

[Adrena1in]

I think what David is saying is how did you expose for 74s in TV mode? I thought Shutter Priority limited it to 30s. (I'm probably wrong though.)

Whatever, your image has certainly given me the idea to experiment with shots of M31 at shorter and shorter focal lengths, right down to 10mm. :)

[Celestron]

I disagree. Johnny's and my M31 shots are "as is"...that's how it appears with the camera upright. ;)

Read Image Orientation (http://www.spaceref.com/telescopes/Image-Orientation-Why-Is-Everything-Upside-Down.html) and you will understand image orientation throught a telescope .

[David Ransley]

That is an unguided image. Shot using a regular Bogen tripod. No tracking involved. I am guessing that at 24mm the errors are beneath visual acuity especially when reduced in size like this web-version is.

Thanks, I am also looking at the stars, and you either need to get some decent gear, or appraoch it from a perspective of photograping the bigger picture. 25 to 30 minutes provides good lines.

[Adrena1in]

Read Image Orientation (http://www.spaceref.com/telescopes/Image-Orientation-Why-Is-Everything-Upside-Down.html) and you will understand image orientation throught a telescope .

I do understand all that, but I'm not convinced...when I take prime photos using my refractors I'm sure the images are always the right way up. Only my recent eyepiece-projection images of the moon were upside down and back to front, and I had to rotate them 180-degrees to solve this. My shots of M31 are always prime though, so is that not the way it appears in the northern hemisphere? :???:

[Celestron]

I do understand all that, but I'm not convinced...when I take prime photos using my refractors I'm sure the images are always the right way up. Only my recent eyepiece-projection images of the moon were upside down and back to front, and I had to rotate them 180-degrees to solve this. My shots of M31 are always prime though, so is that not the way it appears in the northern hemisphere? :???:


In the link i provided did you read where it said this quote :

Refractor and Cassegrain telescopes (http://www.telescopes.com/categories/Telescopes.html) will produce an image that is upside down when used without a diagonal . When a diagonal is used the image will be corrected right side up, but backwards from left to right. It will look like trying to read a sign in a mirror. There are special diagonals called Erect Image Prism diagonals that can correct the backwards image for land use.


Not trying to confuse you but like the statement says when not using a diagonal (Prime Focus) the image will be upside down . Thats why the image looks like it's correct in your camera cause your camera takes whatever is projected to the chip in your camera . Take your scope out in the daytime and take the diagonal out and insert only the eyepiece and look at how everything looks in your scope . The landscape will be upside down . Same way with outerspace . Hope this helps more .

[Adrena1in]

Not trying to confuse you but like the statement says when not using a diagonal (Prime Focus) the image will be upside down .

Okay, I see what you're saying, but isn't that just for viewing? If not, explain this;

When I hooked my camera straight up to my 400mm scope, Prime focus, I got the image I posted on page 2. Same orientation as Johnny's picture.

When I shot M31 last night with my 50mm f/1.8 Prime lens, it appeared the same way up.

I will point out that I'm shooting it facing east, when it's rising. Were I shooting it facing west, as it drops through the sky, I admit it would be the other way up.

EDIT: See, my original shot using my 400mm Orion ST refractor, and a magnified shot from last night with my 50mm f/1.8 lens. You'll notice the orientation is exactly the same in each.

http://img401.imageshack.us/img401/328/m31400mm50mmcomparisonfm5.jpg (http://imageshack.us)
http://img401.imageshack.us/img401/m31400mm50mmcomparisonfm5.jpg/1/w700.png (http://g.imageshack.us/img401/m31400mm50mmcomparisonfm5.jpg/1/)

[Celestron]

Okay, I see what you're saying, but isn't that just for viewing? If not, explain this;

When I hooked my camera straight up to my 400mm scope, Prime focus, I got the image I posted on page 2. Same orientation as Johnny's picture.

When I shot M31 last night with my 50mm f/1.8 Prime lens, it appeared the same way up.

I will point out that I'm shooting it facing east, when it's rising. Were I shooting it facing west, as it drops through the sky, I admit it would be the other way up.

EDIT: See, my original shot using my 400mm Orion ST refractor, and a magnified shot from last night with my 50mm f/1.8 lens. You'll notice the orientation is exactly the same in each.

http://img401.imageshack.us/img401/328/m31400mm50mmcomparisonfm5.jpg (http://imageshack.us)
http://img401.imageshack.us/img401/m31400mm50mmcomparisonfm5.jpg/1/w700.png (http://g.imageshack.us/img401/m31400mm50mmcomparisonfm5.jpg/1/)


At the moment i'm at work and i can't see your 50mm image . But even tho you can see M31 can you actually see the longer galaxie ? I've taken M31 with film and a 50mm lens and i could see M31 but not the close by galaxies . I'll check your image later when i'm home on my computer .

[Dusty]

Being in the southern hemisphere, M31 doesn't rise very high for us and is not visible from some parts of Australia.
I'm lucky to have a good northern horizon but still M31 only rises to 9 deg so it's very very low and that means I'm shooting through a lot of atmosphere.

Anyway here's my attempt at Andromeda, 4x10 min exposures (40 min total) using the 20Da at ISO 400, scope was a TOA 130 at f/5.5 on an EM 400 mount.

I was hoping to get a lot more exposures but the weather put an end to that so that's it for this season, hope to have another go next year again.

Hope you like it.

Dusty

[Celestron]

Another excellent shot Dusty :shock: !! Did you have to rotate this image any or is this the way it came out from your scope at PF ?? Image orientation is right on .

[drevilsmom]

Nice one Dusty!

[Nighthound]

Atmosphere or no atmosphere that's just a beautiful shot period.

Outrageous detail for 40 minutes Dusty. EM 400? Oh man, got drool on my key pad.

:D

Great work!!

Oh, and your Rho shot rocks!!!

[Madweasel]

I'm surprised at all this talk of which way up an image should be. In space there is no up or down. The angle with the horizon will change throughout the day. Why does it matter?

[Celestron]

At the moment i'm at work and i can't see your 50mm image . But even tho you can see M31 can you actually see the longer galaxie ? I've taken M31 with film and a 50mm lens and i could see M31 but not the close by galaxies . I'll check your image later when i'm home on my computer .

Well i can't explain why but my Cartes Du Ceil program shows your right :o . I can't explain it and looks like everyone that has ever posted an image of M31 needs to rotate their image ( i'm talking world-wide ) but i'm not going to argue with them about it . I took this jpeg image of how the sky with M31 looks above my home and it does show M110 to the left side . However I have a Celestron C8 SCT 8" and when i look at M31 with the diagonal in place and a 31mm Plossi eye-piece i have always seen M110 to the left side of M31 just like in your image but Celestron says that images in a C8 using a diagonal and eye-piece that the image is upright but reversed from left to right so guess i'll have to find out more why this is so . But for now i wont disagree with you about the orientation of your M31 .

[Dusty]

Another excellent shot Dusty :shock: !! Did you have to rotate this image any or is this the way it came out from your scope at PF ?? Image orientation is right on .
Thank you, the image was as it came out apart from framing it diagonally to fit M31 in the FOV, it's so big !
I understand what you mean though, I like this orientation as the galaxy just looks like it sits right and because we're in the southern hemisphere it does come out this was given all other things being equal.
It's like how the moon is inverted from our point of view too here in the south.

Nice one Dusty!
Much appreciated !

Atmosphere or no atmosphere that's just a beautiful shot period.

Outrageous detail for 40 minutes Dusty. EM 400? Oh man, got drool on my key pad.

:D

Great work!!

Oh, and your Rho shot rocks!!!
Glad you liked it Steve, thank you, yes I was really surprised how much I captured with the 20Da.
The EM400 is a dream mount, a pleasure to use and rock solid.
I'm very happy with the Rho shot too, thanks for checking it out Steve, glad you liked it.

I'm surprised at all this talk of which way up an image should be. In space there is no up or down. The angle with the horizon will change throughout the day. Why does it matter?

I think orientation was being discussed only in terms of which hemisphere the image was taken.
For us here in the southern hemi, any image taken will be inverted as compared to the northern hemi guys, given all other things being the same.
But you're right, once in space there is no right way up.
I do find though that there is a proper way to frame celestial objects just like there is in terrestrial photog.
If you can frame the celestial object better then it leads to a more aesthetic image IMO.

[Nighthound]

[/QUOTEI think orientation was being discussed only in terms of which hemisphere the image was taken.
For us here in the southern hemi, any image taken will be inverted as compared to the northern hemi guys, given all other things being the same.
But you're right, once in space there is no right way up.
I do find though that there is a proper way to frame celestial objects just like there is in terrestrial photog.
If you can frame the celestial object better then it leads to a more aesthetic image IMO.[/QUOTE]

I agree with this completely. It's the clash of science and art.

The science purist would prefer accurate orientation, the artist a pleasing presentation that "feels" right. Being an artist I compose and work with astro photos just as I do with my terrestrial work, trying to present the image in a visually pleasing way.

[Adrena1in]

I think, at the end of the day, Madweasel and Nighthound have it spot on...there is no "up" or "down" in space. But I do agree that there are better ways to frame a shot. M31 doesn't look right if the arms of the galaxy are horizontal or vertical, but it does look right at a tilt of around 30 degrees. In really good shots I do actually think it also looks better with the spiral arm that is nearer to us on the bottom of the shot, which I think is opposite to the way I shoot it.

But for now, I will nearly always have my camera "the right way up" relative to the ground whenever I shoot something, as I just find it easier to work the camera that way. I'll only generally twist it about to fit something into the frame better.

So, let's end this debate on correct orientation and just continue to admire the excellent shots people are posting, yeah? :)

[hairycrab]

Here's my effort. Taken using the 350D coupled to a William Optics ZS66SD mounted on the Nexstar 6SE mount. Image is a result of 250 light frames stacked, each exposure is for 30s at ISO800 (total exposure time 2hrs).

http://niksyahron.smugmug.com/photos/352923263_shTnh-L.jpg

[Celestron]

Real nice Hairycrab ! Looks similiar to the one on my website only yours has better detail and a longer exposer time .

[timeasterday]

Had this framed nicely to begin with but my guiding scope (Celestron SCT) shifted the mirror at one point and cut off M110. Taken with a WO ZS80FD and a Rebel XT. About 3 hours worth of 5-minute exposures.

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2337/2238384962_37afc39a5e_b.jpg

[malla1962]

All awsome shots.

[hairycrab]

Very nice Tim!

[MacDogg]

Fantastic shots by all!

Wow, I am amazed at how easy it sounds to take pictures like these posted. I know it really isn't easy but I think I might take a chance and see if I can figure this out.
I have an Orion XT8 with a 25mm and 10mm eye piece. The only thing I need to figure out is how to use DSS. I tried in the past but it didn't work.

[Adrena1in]

Wow, I am amazed at how easy it sounds to take pictures like these posted. I know it really isn't easy but I think I might take a chance and see if I can figure this out.

Ooh, it's certainly not necessarily as easy at it sounds. You can spends loads to make it easier, but even then it takes a lot of learning. I've been going almost two years and have yet to create a photo I'm particularly proud of.

You'll get plenty of advice here if you do start down the Astrophotography path.

As for DSS, do you mean Deep Sky Stacker? That's pretty easy to use really, (though I only know how to use it basically...I don't know about all the settings within it.)

[MacDogg]

As for DSS, do you mean Deep Sky Stacker? That's pretty easy to use really, (though I only know how to use it basically...I don't know about all the settings within it.)

Yes, that is what I meant by DSS. I tired stacking a bunch of Jupiter shots but every time I tried to stack I would end up with Jupiter all over the final picture, they were never right on top of each other! Haha.

[Adrena1in]

Ah, now I've had problems with Jupiter and Moon shots using DSS, yes. For stars it's great, even multiple shots taken with a static camera where the stars have moved a lot, but for planets there are perhaps other settings that need to be chacked. (I don't get multiple iamges of the object across the screen, but I do seem to just get a vastly over-exposed result.)

For Jupiter I'd suggest giving Registax a try. That's FREE too. The standard settings in that are pretty good I think, (though the software itself is a little confusing).

[markjpcs]

I like this new camera!

Canon 50D, AP Traveler w/Telecompressor, 1 x 300sec unguided, ISO 1600 no darks or flats.

I know this single frame will not win any awards but the signal to noise is very good IMO.

http://www.pcsincnet.com/M31-Canon50DISO16001x5min1024.jpg

[Nighthound]

10 minutes at 1600? Unguided? Wholey Carp!!

I'd say noise is a non-issue with your 50D. That's amazing and very helpful for limiting noise reduction which will reduce the compromise of detail. It looks like Canon delivered on the less noise promise with this model.

I was just reading up on the early user reviews on the 50D and I was finding several that said the image sharpness out of the camera was not as good as the 40D. Have you tested it much for daytime use? I shoot a lot of nature/wildlife too and will eventually be looking for a new body and the 6.9 fps is very attractive for action. It's not apples to apples for me to compare my 5D(full frame) to the 50D but the 5D's 3.9 fps is very lacking for my day use. Focus response is a bit sub par as well.

Your 50D looks VERY capable for astro and makes it all the more interesting to me. Hmmm...

[markjpcs]

The 600 seconds was a typo.

it was 300 seconds.

But yeah, I love this camera for astro work.

Daytime I am still in "eval mode" with the kit lens. It's not as sharp as I would like but then again it is probably me and not the equipment.

[Celestron]

Wow Mark :shock: ! Great shot for short exposer !