|
Re: How to tighten Mach2 base
yanzhe liu
George, Thanks! I did not get time to try the suggestion yet. I will let you know how it goes. Yanzhe
On Tue, Jul 27, 2021 at 11:31 AM George <george@...> wrote:
|
|
|
|
Re: The Elephant Trunk Nebula in the Hubble palette
Robert Chozick <rchozick@...>
I do the same thing. It’s sometimes works like deconvolution to help later sharpening. The DeNoise software is incredible on any images that have a lot of noise.
toggle quoted messageShow quoted text
Robert
On Jul 27, 2021, at 1:03 PM, Dale Ghent <daleg@...> wrote:
|
|
|
|
Re: Mach2 APCC/APPM model for multiple nights in a mobile setting
Eric Claeys
The ground could have shifted, causing the error. I found this to be the case in SW NM on hard desert dirt.
|
|
|
|
Re: How to tighten Mach2 base
George
Yanzhe,
Contact me directly at email address below. I’m sure that it is a simple solution.
Regards,
George
George Whitney Astro-Physics, Inc. Phone: 815-222-6538 (direct line) Phone: 815-282-1513 (office) Email: george@...
From: main@ap-gto.groups.io <main@ap-gto.groups.io>
On Behalf Of yanzhe liu
Sent: Monday, July 26, 2021 1:14 PM To: main@ap-gto.groups.io Subject: Re: [ap-gto] How to tighten Mach2 base
On Mon, Jul 26, 2021 at 8:43 AM George <george@...> wrote:
Yes, I belive so.
The problem I am seeing is without Tripd. I turn the mount up side down, and I can feel the backlash if I move the base back and forth. Anything else should I check?
|
|
|
|
Re: The Elephant Trunk Nebula in the Hubble palette
Dale Ghent
I've played around with Topaz. I got acceptable results by not giving it free reign. I'd make an original and a Topaz'd layer in PS and brush in the Topaz'd layer with varying levels of opacity to bring out its effects in a more subtle manner and in the places I thought it would work the best. I found it a good way to give a hint of sharpened structure to the eye without it being too overbearing as the pure Topaz'd layer would feel.
toggle quoted messageShow quoted text
On Jul 27, 2021, at 13:57, Brian Valente <bvalente@...> wrote:
|
|
|
|
Re: The Elephant Trunk Nebula in the Hubble palette
I am - i'm a longtime user of topaz and topaz AI. They can be really good, but generally for me they tend to be a bit heavy-handed, especially the denoise algorithms. I find Topaz clarity and detail are much better for teasing out details. My hope is Topaz will start their AI training on astro images, which will make their algorithms much better suited for our work.
--
|
|
|
|
Re: The Elephant Trunk Nebula in the Hubble palette
Robert Chozick <rchozick@...>
Are you familiar with Topaz noise reduction and sharpening? It works wonders on some things, especially the DeNoise. It is available standalone or as a PS plugin.
toggle quoted messageShow quoted text
Robert
On Jul 27, 2021, at 11:46 AM, Brian Valente <bvalente@...> wrote: Yeah it's interesting to see how processing techniques are evolving. Starnet was a curiosity a couple years ago, and now it's front and center! Brian
|
|
|
|
Re: The Elephant Trunk Nebula in the Hubble palette
Yeah it's interesting to see how processing techniques are evolving. Starnet was a curiosity a couple years ago, and now it's front and center! Brian
--
|
|
|
|
Re: The Elephant Trunk Nebula in the Hubble palette
Robert Chozick <rchozick@...>
I agree. I meant that my method of masking out the target for processing, leaving the stars and background alone, does not work on extended nebula and large galaxies. I am excited for the possibilities of the new method.
toggle quoted messageShow quoted text
Really nice image but the stars are not as pronounced as they would be. I will play with the process. Robert
On Jul 27, 2021, at 11:15 AM, Brian Valente <bvalente@...> wrote: Hi Robert >>>For extended nebula or large galaxies this does not work. i think it works exceptionally well for extended nebulas, where enhancing the nebulosity without hurting the stars can really bring out structures Although this image could certainly be improved, I used this approach to pull out nebulosity and blend back with the "regular version". IIRC i did this going between PS and Pix (can't speak to galaxies because I use other techniques for those)
|
|
|
|
Re: The Elephant Trunk Nebula in the Hubble palette
Hi Robert >>>For extended nebula or large galaxies this does not work. i think it works exceptionally well for extended nebulas, where enhancing the nebulosity without hurting the stars can really bring out structures Although this image could certainly be improved, I used this approach to pull out nebulosity and blend back with the "regular version". IIRC i did this going between PS and Pix (can't speak to galaxies because I use other techniques for those)
--
|
|
|
|
Re: The Elephant Trunk Nebula in the Hubble palette
Robert Chozick <rchozick@...>
Thanks. This sounds like a very useful tool. As you all know, destruction of the stars is so easy with all the processes we do to make our pretty pictures. Around a small target in Photoshop I can bring back the original background and stars easily. For extended nebula or large galaxies this does not work.
toggle quoted messageShow quoted text
Robert
On Jul 27, 2021, at 10:23 AM, Brian Valente <bvalente@...> wrote:
|
|
|
|
Re: The Elephant Trunk Nebula in the Hubble palette
Starnet only works on stretched images and is now part of regular PixInsight distribution
The "starmask" version produces a color version of the stars, which is good for blending back, but this approach can have some artifacting around the stars. A typical application is to use starnet to create the starless version for enhancing the nebulosity, then blending back into the "regular" image version using something like Screen blend mode (PS or PixInsight). ymmv Brian
|
|
|
|
Re: The Elephant Trunk Nebula in the Hubble palette
Robert Chozick <rchozick@...>
Thanks Glenn. I will check out the application. I’ve been lazy and not downloaded the newer version of Pixinsight. Wouldn’t the star mask only be a gray representation of where the stars were and not the actual image of the stars themselves?
toggle quoted messageShow quoted text
Robert
On Jul 27, 2021, at 9:43 AM, Glenn <public@...> wrote:
|
|
|
|
Re: Mach2 APCC/APPM model for multiple nights in a mobile setting
Joseph Beyer
The process of covering and uncovering my equipment combined with ground movements, +/- tripod dynamics (it’s a Berlebach) changes my PA every night. Once I correct the PA each night my model works fine for at least a week. That’s on a Mach1 unguided.
|
|
|
|
Re: Mach2 APCC/APPM model for multiple nights in a mobile setting
David Johnson
I often leave my equipment set up over multiple nights when the weather is favorable (as it is right now). I always do a quick polar alignment and redo mapping each night. I don’t know if this is necessary, especially at shorter focal lengths, but I have seen issues, which I believe might be due to the tripod settling into the soil. It’s generally possible to finish both polar alignment and mapping before it’s dark enough to do serious imaging, so there’s little or no time lost. I understand that if the polar alignment is correct that I theoretically don’t need to remap, but polar alignment is never perfect, and mapping with APPM is quick and automated and accounts for PA errors. When I eventually get a permanent setup, I don’t think this will be necessary.
|
|
|
|
Re: Mach2 APCC/APPM model for multiple nights in a mobile setting
Bill Long
Something is changing day over day that is enough to invalidate the mount model. You could try fixing the PA before each run and see if that has any effect. Maybe something is getting disturbed when you cover and uncover the gear?
From: main@ap-gto.groups.io <main@ap-gto.groups.io> on behalf of mindspringtsai@... <mindspringtsai@...>
Sent: Tuesday, July 27, 2021 7:42 AM To: main@ap-gto.groups.io <main@ap-gto.groups.io> Subject: [ap-gto] Mach2 APCC/APPM model for multiple nights in a mobile setting I'm seeking advice on a multiple night mobile workflow to reuse an APCC/APPM pointing/tracking model created on the first for subsequent nights.
Here are my observations from the most recent new moon: Night 1: Created 50pt model. Successfully imaged unguided throughout the night on a two objects in different parts of the sky. Powered down mount and covered it during the day. Night 2: Powered up mount, ran APPM verify with 30pts and found pretty large pointing deltas, greater than several arcmin. A quick test exposure seemed to show a little bit of star trailing, but I didn't not spend time to quantify or debugging it. Since the object I was shooting had a limited window, I just ran another 50pt model and successfully imaged throughout the night again. Powered down mount and covered it during the day. Night 3: Ran 50pt model and successfully imaged throughout the night. Running a 50pt model every night isn't a deal breaker for me because it only takes about 20min, but I'm interested in the experience of other mobile imagers. Other details that may or may not be relevant: OTA is OS RH200 and camera is ASI6200. Cheers, Curtis
|
|
|
|
Mach2 APCC/APPM model for multiple nights in a mobile setting
mindspringtsai@...
I'm seeking advice on a multiple night mobile workflow to reuse an APCC/APPM pointing/tracking model created on the first for subsequent nights.
Here are my observations from the most recent new moon: Night 1: Created 50pt model. Successfully imaged unguided throughout the night on a two objects in different parts of the sky. Powered down mount and covered it during the day. Night 2: Powered up mount, ran APPM verify with 30pts and found pretty large pointing deltas, greater than several arcmin. A quick test exposure seemed to show a little bit of star trailing, but I didn't not spend time to quantify or debugging it. Since the object I was shooting had a limited window, I just ran another 50pt model and successfully imaged throughout the night again. Powered down mount and covered it during the day. Night 3: Ran 50pt model and successfully imaged throughout the night. Running a 50pt model every night isn't a deal breaker for me because it only takes about 20min, but I'm interested in the experience of other mobile imagers. Other details that may or may not be relevant: OTA is OS RH200 and camera is ASI6200. Cheers, Curtis
|
|
|
|
Re: The Elephant Trunk Nebula in the Hubble palette
Glenn
I forgot to mention that once you have a starless image, you can import it into Photoshop and do whatever you want with it.
Best, Glenn
|
|
|
|
Re: The Elephant Trunk Nebula in the Hubble palette
Glenn
Thank you, Robert.
The process called Starnet+, which is also integrated into PixInsight, does not automatically produce a separate image with the stars that were just removed. However, doing so is easy and only requires checking the "make star mask" button in the process window. I have been doing it on stretched images but I think the process may be been updated to work on linear ones—you would have to verify. You could make a starless image either in PixInsight or by running Starnet+ as a separate application. The program is available on one of the more popular open-source repositories (can't remember which). Best, Glenn
|
|
|
|
Re: Tool for saddle clamping
Joseph Beyer
I keep a pair of nitrile gloves in my equipment box and slip one on my right hand to get a bit more grip on the knob when removing the telescope. I've always been able to release the knobs wearing the gloves no matter the temperature. They are inexpensive enough to just replace when they age to the point of not being as effective.
|
|
|
