Approve the Cookies
This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and our Privacy Policy.
OK
Forums  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear
Guest
Forums  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear
Register to forums    Log in

 
FORUMS Photo Sharing & Discussion Astronomy & Celestial 
Thread started 08 Oct 2016 (Saturday) 18:29
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links (only for non-logged)

My winter project, Orion Molecular Cloud Complex at various focal lengths

 
TCampbell
Senior Member
455 posts
Gallery: 13 photos
Likes: 289
Joined Apr 2012
     
Oct 13, 2016 11:03 |  #16

pdxbenedetti wrote in post #18154201 (external link)
Do you have a tutorial on splitting the individual channels and restacking? I'm using PixInsight, I've gotten somewhat comfortable with the calibration, registration, and integration process (including debayering and drizzle), but I've not read about that kind of process.

The CA removal is ok for most of the image, but it definitely creates weird artifacts in the Horsehead region (colorless rings around stars) mostly due to the fact that the color in that region is the same as the CA being removed. What I ended up doing was removing the CA in one version of the image, then layering another version of the image without any CA removal and masking in the Horsehead region. This is with the 135mm lens, btw, the 85mm lens appears to have a bit less CA and so removal didn't really create any artifacts or problems. I also had the 85mm lens stopped down quite a bit to f4 to reduce coma and taking 5 minute exposures whereas with the 135mm I was shooting f2.8 to capture more light with 2 minute exposures.

I don't have a specific "tutorial" but in PixInsight the essential steps are to:

1) Split the single RGB color image into it's constituent color channels (use "Split RGB Channels" which has an icon along the top or if you prefer the menu navigation it's under "Image" -> "Extract" -> "Split RGB Channels". This will create three views which will all have the same name as your original view but they'll append a suffix "..._R", "..._G", and "..._B" after the name.

2) You can now treat those images as if they were all taken independently. This means you can use the same tools you would normally use to align the stars between images if you were taking lots of "lights" and wanted to stack them. True chromatic aberration caused by a lens (as opposed to atmospheric dispersion caused by the sky) causes the "blue" light to bend inward more and focuses at a closer distance than the blue, which focuses at a closer distance than the red. That means that your "blue" channel image stars are actually just fractionally closer together than your "red" stars. PixInsight has options when doing star alignment which allows it to resize the image when registering the image.

One of the cool things about PI is that images do not need to be in the same scale. If you were doing a mosaic of a section of sky, you can use manual star alignment tools where YOU pick the same star in two different images (so PI knows that this star in image #1 is the same star in image #2 even though the images are just overlapping areas of sky and not the same piece of sky). You normally do this with at least 2 or three stars to get a good fit.

But another cool thing is that multiple astro-images can collaborate on imaging... e.g. one astrophotographer captures some data using their scope & camera and another gets data using a different scope & camera... but they merge their data. The obvious problem is since the scopes may be completely different models, the area of sky can be completely different, the orientation of the cameras may have been completely different, and the image resolution and size of the cameras may have been completely different. But PI can rescale the images to make them fit. Automatic star alignment may fail (and probably will) because the scale is off... but if you use the same technique of identifying the same 2 or 3 stars in different images, it will understand how to do any manipulation to make them fit.

In essence this is what you're doing with the CA correction... except in your case the stars will nearly fit because they were all from the same image, but the CA means there's just a tiny amount of scale difference between the images.

Dynamic Alignment can do it, and I think there are options (modes) of Star Alignment that can do it. If what your really have is atmospheric dispersion and not CA then the atmosphere is separating the light and usually that causes the R, G, & B channels to all be slightly shifted (offset from each other) but not necessarily re-scaled.

You do have to pick a reference channel. I pick green because that's in the middle of the color spectrum but I'm not sure it really matters... and then tell PixInsight to register the red & blue channels to my green channel.

3) Now that you have "registered" images, you can re-combine them using a tool such as "Channel Combination".

You should now be back to a single RGB image, but the color channels for your stars should now line up nicely.

4) Since you fractionally adjusted your images to make the color channels align nicely, your borders no longer align so nicely. You'll want to do a very slight crop to get rid of any ragged edges caused by the star alignment process.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
pdxbenedetti
THREAD ­ STARTER
Senior Member
Avatar
312 posts
Gallery: 2 photos
Likes: 1027
Joined Jul 2015
Location: Salt Lake City, United States
     
Oct 13, 2016 15:36 as a reply to  @ TCampbell's post |  #17

Thank you so much for that nice write-up, is this something that can be done after stacking/integration? There's no way I'd attempt to do this on all my subs before stacking.


flickr (external link)
SmugMug (external link)
Facebook (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
TCampbell
Senior Member
455 posts
Gallery: 13 photos
Likes: 289
Joined Apr 2012
     
Oct 13, 2016 17:28 |  #18

pdxbenedetti wrote in post #18156056 (external link)
Thank you so much for that nice write-up, is this something that can be done after stacking/integration? There's no way I'd attempt to do this on all my subs before stacking.

That's how I did it. I ended up with my final "master" light and I did the split, re-register the stars, and re-combied.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
basketballfreak6
Goldmember
1,561 posts
Gallery: 1 photo
Likes: 3483
Joined Jan 2011
Location: Brisbane, Australia
     
Oct 15, 2016 18:17 |  #19

awesome shots Eric, and glad to hear your mum is better

MW season coming to an end here too, looking forward to tackling the Orion region again myself


https://www.tonyliupho​tography.com.au/ (external link)
https://www.instagram.​com/tonyliuphotography​/ (external link)
flickr (external link)
R6, M6II, modified 77D, 16-35L f/4 IS, 24-70L II f/2.8, 70-200L IS II f/2.8, S150-600 f/5-6.3 C, S14 f/1.8 ART, S50 f/1.4 ART, S135 f/1.8 ART, 100L IS Macro f/2.8

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
pdxbenedetti
THREAD ­ STARTER
Senior Member
Avatar
312 posts
Gallery: 2 photos
Likes: 1027
Joined Jul 2015
Location: Salt Lake City, United States
Post edited over 6 years ago by pdxbenedetti.
     
Oct 28, 2016 11:12 |  #20

basketballfreak6 wrote in post #18157845 (external link)
awesome shots Eric, and glad to hear your mum is better

MW season coming to an end here too, looking forward to tackling the Orion region again myself

Thanks!

Been trying out my Rokinon 135mm lens for deep sky astrophotography, this time on Andromeda. Used my Nikon D7000 body and my Sky Watcher Star Adventurer mount, shot from my driveway in the middle of Salt Lake City (Bortle 9 light pollution). This is 67 exposures at 1.5 minutes, ISO 800 and f4 as well as 33 exposures at 3 minutes, ISO 400 and f4 for a total of about 3 hours and 20 minutes. Also used 100 bias frames to make a SuperBias for calibration. I've also decided to start getting into the nitty gritty with PixInsight, use the Subframe Selector script to analyze the subs, eliminate crappy subs (which ended up being over 1/3rd of the shots I took over 2 nights thanks to clouds and tracking error), then assign weighting to each sub based on quality for stacking.

Turned out ok given the light pollution and my novice status with PixInsight, any constructive criticism and advice would certainly be welcome.

IMAGE: https://c1.staticflickr.com/6/5522/30293949200_6094d7c404_b.jpg
IMAGE LINK: https://flic.kr/p/N9Yp​EY  (external link) Andromeda (external link) by Eric (external link), on Flickr

flickr (external link)
SmugMug (external link)
Facebook (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Keltab
Senior Member
Avatar
912 posts
Gallery: 7 photos
Likes: 257
Joined Apr 2007
Location: Colorado
     
Oct 28, 2016 11:58 |  #21

pdxbenedetti wrote in post #18169519 (external link)
Thanks!

Been trying out my Rokinon 135mm lens for deep sky astrophotography, this time on Andromeda. Used my Nikon D7000 body and my Sky Watcher Star Adventurer mount, shot from my driveway in the middle of Salt Lake City (Bortle 9 light pollution). This is 67 exposures at 1.5 minutes, ISO 800 and f4 as well as 33 exposures at 3 minutes, ISO 400 and f4 for a total of about 3 hours and 20 minutes. Also used 100 bias frames to make a SuperBias for calibration. I've also decided to start getting into the nitty gritty with PixInsight, use the Subframe Selector script to analyze the subs, eliminate crappy subs (which ended up being over 1/3rd of the shots I took over 2 nights thanks to clouds and tracking error), then assign weighting to each sub based on quality for stacking.

Turned out ok given the light pollution and my novice status with PixInsight, any constructive criticism and advice would certainly be welcome.

QUOTED IMAGE
IMAGE LINK: https://flic.kr/p/N9Yp​EY  (external link) Andromeda (external link) by Eric (external link), on Flickr

I like it! I'm curious if you can reduce the amount of stars away from the main object so it stands out more? Sort of "masking" the other stuff? Not sure how that would really impact it but I think it might highlight Andromeda that much more.

Great job!



The Only Difference Between Ordinary and Extraordinary Is That Little Extra :D

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
pdxbenedetti
THREAD ­ STARTER
Senior Member
Avatar
312 posts
Gallery: 2 photos
Likes: 1027
Joined Jul 2015
Location: Salt Lake City, United States
     
Oct 28, 2016 12:52 |  #22

Keltab wrote in post #18169549 (external link)
I like it! I'm curious if you can reduce the amount of stars away from the main object so it stands out more? Sort of "masking" the other stuff? Not sure how that would really impact it but I think it might highlight Andromeda that much more.

Great job!

Thanks, I actually did a substantial star size reduction step already which helped a lot, shrinking them more than this started making some weird artifacts in the background so I just decided to stop there.


flickr (external link)
SmugMug (external link)
Facebook (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
andicus
Senior Member
313 posts
Likes: 140
Joined Aug 2009
     
Oct 28, 2016 16:03 as a reply to  @ pdxbenedetti's post |  #23

That's damn impressive for Bortle 9.

I don't get anywhere near that with my 8" scope, mainly due to limited exposure time due to poor alignment.

Not having a view of Polaris makes it difficult. I know there are other methods, including All Star Polar Alignment, but I've only ever gotten about 40 seconds before trailing.

Really nice job, Eric!




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
basketballfreak6
Goldmember
1,561 posts
Gallery: 1 photo
Likes: 3483
Joined Jan 2011
Location: Brisbane, Australia
     
Oct 29, 2016 00:59 |  #24

pdxbenedetti wrote in post #18169519 (external link)
Thanks!

Been trying out my Rokinon 135mm lens for deep sky astrophotography, this time on Andromeda. Used my Nikon D7000 body and my Sky Watcher Star Adventurer mount, shot from my driveway in the middle of Salt Lake City (Bortle 9 light pollution). This is 67 exposures at 1.5 minutes, ISO 800 and f4 as well as 33 exposures at 3 minutes, ISO 400 and f4 for a total of about 3 hours and 20 minutes. Also used 100 bias frames to make a SuperBias for calibration. I've also decided to start getting into the nitty gritty with PixInsight, use the Subframe Selector script to analyze the subs, eliminate crappy subs (which ended up being over 1/3rd of the shots I took over 2 nights thanks to clouds and tracking error), then assign weighting to each sub based on quality for stacking.

Turned out ok given the light pollution and my novice status with PixInsight, any constructive criticism and advice would certainly be welcome.

QUOTED IMAGE
IMAGE LINK: https://flic.kr/p/N9Yp​EY  (external link) Andromeda (external link) by Eric (external link), on Flickr

good stuff Eric...still shocked you're able to get that in the amount of light pollution you're in, did you use any sort of light pollution filter at all?


https://www.tonyliupho​tography.com.au/ (external link)
https://www.instagram.​com/tonyliuphotography​/ (external link)
flickr (external link)
R6, M6II, modified 77D, 16-35L f/4 IS, 24-70L II f/2.8, 70-200L IS II f/2.8, S150-600 f/5-6.3 C, S14 f/1.8 ART, S50 f/1.4 ART, S135 f/1.8 ART, 100L IS Macro f/2.8

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
pdxbenedetti
THREAD ­ STARTER
Senior Member
Avatar
312 posts
Gallery: 2 photos
Likes: 1027
Joined Jul 2015
Location: Salt Lake City, United States
     
Oct 29, 2016 13:39 |  #25

andicus wrote in post #18169766 (external link)
That's damn impressive for Bortle 9.

I don't get anywhere near that with my 8" scope, mainly due to limited exposure time due to poor alignment.

Not having a view of Polaris makes it difficult. I know there are other methods, including All Star Polar Alignment, but I've only ever gotten about 40 seconds before trailing.

Really nice job, Eric!

You could also try drift aligning, that might be a lot more work but if you don't have any other choice...

basketballfreak6 wrote in post #18170084 (external link)
good stuff Eric...still shocked you're able to get that in the amount of light pollution you're in, did you use any sort of light pollution filter at all?

Thanks, I do have an Optolong UHC (ultra high contrast - light pollution suppression) clip in filter for my D7000, I used it for a few exposures (less than 10% of what went into this shot). I was having trouble getting longer exposures and collecting enough light with the filter in so I took it out.


flickr (external link)
SmugMug (external link)
Facebook (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Unbalanced
As one of the gluttons for punishment, I'm glad to see Chet's back
Avatar
7,767 posts
Gallery: 72 photos
Best ofs: 2
Likes: 432
Joined Nov 2009
Location: Colorado
     
Oct 31, 2016 16:18 |  #26

pdxbenedetti wrote in post #18169519 (external link)
Turned out ok

QUOTED IMAGE
IMAGE LINK: https://flic.kr/p/N9Yp​EY  (external link) Andromeda (external link) by Eric (external link), on Flickr

I'll say! That's awesome!

Could you elaborate on your tracking troubles with the Adventurer? Thanks.


The crux of the biscuit is the apostrophe.
flickr (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
pdxbenedetti
THREAD ­ STARTER
Senior Member
Avatar
312 posts
Gallery: 2 photos
Likes: 1027
Joined Jul 2015
Location: Salt Lake City, United States
     
Oct 31, 2016 17:32 as a reply to  @ Unbalanced's post |  #27

My problems were mostly related to coming up against the limits of the mount, mainly that I had the mount, camera, and lens perfectly balanced in the Declination and RA axis and no matter what I couldn't get better than 5 minute exposures with my 135mm lens and 3 minute exposures with my 150-600mm lens. I guess that's just the name of the game with a cheap $400 mount and I shouldn't expect much more.

My goal now (based on reading articles and talking with a few other Star Adventurer users) is to possibly open up the mount and tighten up the worm gear components a little to try and reduce the backlash and then look at guiding the RA axis with a guidescope + cam via the ST4 port on the mount.


flickr (external link)
SmugMug (external link)
Facebook (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
pdxbenedetti
THREAD ­ STARTER
Senior Member
Avatar
312 posts
Gallery: 2 photos
Likes: 1027
Joined Jul 2015
Location: Salt Lake City, United States
Post edited over 6 years ago by pdxbenedetti.
     
Oct 31, 2016 17:37 |  #28

It was mostly cloudy this weekend so I didn't get much of a chance to add to the Orion images, I went out and tried shooting at a place I thought would make a good winter shooting location based on light pollution maps (easy access, supposedly bortle 3), turned out not so great, guess I'll have to keep searching. I also changed up my setup a little bit, opened up the legs on my tripod and hung a 20 pound dumbbell under it for better stability, now it's rock solid. I tried shooting 5 minute exposures with my D7000 and Samyang 135mm lens, it seems like I can get to 5 minutes fairly consistently with not too many subs that have to be thrown out (keeper rate of about 75% I'd guess), but once I go above 5 minute exposures the keeper rate drops down to probably 30%. The periodic error (?) of the mount is 10 minutes from what I've read so I guess once you get up to that length of exposure you are running into mount limitations. I'm thinking of buying a guidescope and camera and trying out some guiding with the mount to see if I can improve the keeper rate, I'd really love to take some super long exposures (like 10 minutes) to really bring out the dust around this area as well.

So I ended up only getting another 6 subs out of all the ones I shot thanks to clouds and tracking error, I decided to go back and re-calibrate, register, and stack in PixInsight this time using the subframe selector script to weight the subs prior to registering/stacking. I also tried not going to wild on the post processing and just focusing on bringing out the dust without destroying the image with noise.

IMAGE: https://c2.staticflickr.com/6/5450/30675254665_015566404c_b.jpg
IMAGE LINK: https://flic.kr/p/NJEG​v8  (external link) Orion, Running Man, Horsehead, and Flame Nebula (external link) by Eric (external link), on Flickr

Now that I have a better grasp on balancing this mount and getting pretty long exposures I think I'm going to "start over", in essence I'd like to HDR this image and right now I kind of have a weird mix of exposures at different lengths, different ISO's, different apertures so I think I'm just going to pick one ISO, one aperture and then collect subs of different lengths. It's been a learning experience to say the least, good thing Orion season is just beginning.

flickr (external link)
SmugMug (external link)
Facebook (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
calypsob
Goldmember
Avatar
1,179 posts
Gallery: 3 photos
Likes: 91
Joined Jan 2012
Location: Lynchburg Virginia
     
Nov 01, 2016 21:08 |  #29

pdxbenedetti wrote in post #18154201 (external link)
Do you have a tutorial on splitting the individual channels and restacking? I'm using PixInsight, I've gotten somewhat comfortable with the calibration, registration, and integration process (including debayering and drizzle), but I've not read about that kind of process.

The CA removal is ok for most of the image, but it definitely creates weird artifacts in the Horsehead region (colorless rings around stars) mostly due to the fact that the color in that region is the same as the CA being removed. What I ended up doing was removing the CA in one version of the image, then layering another version of the image without any CA removal and masking in the Horsehead region. This is with the 135mm lens, btw, the 85mm lens appears to have a bit less CA and so removal didn't really create any artifacts or problems. I also had the 85mm lens stopped down quite a bit to f4 to reduce coma and taking 5 minute exposures whereas with the 135mm I was shooting f2.8 to capture more light with 2 minute exposures.



Eric, I think 1 of two things, either your focus may just be a tad off or you are not using a uvir cut filter. I have been using this lens as well and there is no CA when I use the astronomik uvir cut clip in filter, but without, the full spectrum dslr shows some star bloat because the lens cannot correct uv/ir on a full spectrum camera. Now you could also just be facing issues with star color calibration but my first bet is on bloat. Here are two sample images, the colors are not calibrated, not flats or darks applied just a single raw exposure uv/ir cut vs no uv/ir cut. As you can see there is a huge difference. Now your pixel scale is different than mine because you are using a FF body, but I do think that you might overcome your issues.

IMAGE: https://c3.staticflickr.com/2/1473/25709571666_49c7371cce.jpg
IMAGE LINK: https://flic.kr/p/FaSg​X1  (external link) m81 night 3_1 with filter-uv/ir cut (external link) by Wes Schwarz (external link), on Flickr

IMAGE: https://c7.staticflickr.com/2/1631/25709577726_358ec089c0.jpg
IMAGE LINK: https://flic.kr/p/FaSi​Ku  (external link) m81 120s_1 no filter (external link) by Wes Schwarz (external link), on Flickr

Wes
-----------
flickr (external link)
Gear: Many gears Yes.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
calypsob
Goldmember
Avatar
1,179 posts
Gallery: 3 photos
Likes: 91
Joined Jan 2012
Location: Lynchburg Virginia
     
Nov 01, 2016 21:09 as a reply to  @ post 18155762 |  #30

this new samyang 135mm F2 is a game changer in so many ways, I am very impressed. I also own a copy and have several images with just an unbelievable amount of data built up from shooting F2.


Wes
-----------
flickr (external link)
Gear: Many gears Yes.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links (only for non-logged)

13,793 views & 48 likes for this thread, 12 members have posted to it and it is followed by 6 members.
My winter project, Orion Molecular Cloud Complex at various focal lengths
FORUMS Photo Sharing & Discussion Astronomy & Celestial 
AAA
x 1600
y 1600

Jump to forum...   •  Rules   •  Forums   •  New posts   •  RTAT   •  'Best of'   •  Gallery   •  Gear   •  Reviews   •  Member list   •  Polls   •  Image rules   •  Search   •  Password reset   •  Home

Not a member yet?
Register to forums
Registered members may log in to forums and access all the features: full search, image upload, follow forums, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, all settings, view hosted photos, own reviews, see more and do more... and all is free. Don't be a stranger - register now and start posting!


COOKIES DISCLAIMER: This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and to our privacy policy.
Privacy policy and cookie usage info.


POWERED BY AMASS forum software 2.58forum software
version 2.58 /
code and design
by Pekka Saarinen ©
for photography-on-the.net

Latest registered member is griggt
991 guests, 129 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 15,144, that happened on Nov 22, 2018

Photography-on-the.net Digital Photography Forums is the website for photographers and all who love great photos, camera and post processing techniques, gear talk, discussion and sharing. Professionals, hobbyists, newbies and those who don't even own a camera -- all are welcome regardless of skill, favourite brand, gear, gender or age. Registering and usage is free.