Nothing in astro is "natural looking". Our eyes can't stay open and accumulate light for hours at a time. The "color exaggerated" stuff you often see is usually just as accurate. Additionally, mapping of narrow bands of data to human-recognizable colors is a normal thing done by infrared, x-ray, and other types of telescopes. The data is real. The brownish cast to the images here are more from light pollution than anything else. In a crisp winter sky at a dark site, there is a lot more color in the sky than you might think.
Thanks Pete for the informative comment. I will be completely honest with you. I am very much an amateur in this field. I use a one shot color CMOS camera and do fairly minimal post processing. I use Photoshop to stretch the image and fiddle with all the various settings until it looks about right. One thing I do not do is use the Hubble pallet or alter the colors. I think the previous comment might have been alluding to the use of the Hubble Pallet where the “natural” colors captured by the camera are changed to isolate the Hydrogen, Oxygen, etc. My understanding is that this is done primarily for scientific purposes, although the resulting images often look stunning. Feel free to educate me further as you are clearly further along the learning and mastering curve than I am. I think your comment addresses this topic quite well. But feel free to add more if you feel it would be helpful. Thanks again!
Thanks Bill! Really appreciate the compliment and thank you for watching and commenting. The prints on the wall are photos I've taken over the years and are printed on metal. The metal medium really makes them pop. Highly recommend it. Lots of places on-line where you can print photos on metal. I use a local place. Thanks again!
Whoa nice. I have a 5 inch reflector and was blown away the first time I saw the Andromeda. And that too, visually. Didn't image it. To think this is what 229mly looks like is exhilarating and motivating at the same time. Thanks.
Thanks for watching and commenting. Have you tried imaging yet? You can actually do some pretty good imaging with just a smart phone like an iPhone or Samsung. That’s how I started. Andromeda is doable with a 5” reflector and a smart phone. You will need to buy an attachment to hold your phone in place. Thanks again!
Hey, can you tell me that even after collimating my telescope, to a degree which you can expect reasonably for a bird Jones design, why is it, that i have to pinpoint my focus right on when going for stars and clusters, while to see details on planets i have to go out of focus just slightly the other side? Focusing accurately for planets gives me a concentrated picture, but one which is devoid of any details. Is this due to bird Jones design?an inherent flaw? I am kinda new to this hobby and looking for someone ahead of the curve to give me a bit of advice. Thanks.
Interesting question. I have never owned or used a Bird Jones design. So, I do not know if the issue you are facing is related to the design and mirror difference vs a true Newtonian. However, I can tell you that I struggle with focus on planets. I can use a Bahtinov Mask to get precise focus on stars. But for planets, I have to rely on my eye and trying to get the visual as clear as possible. I find it much more difficult as the planet is moving and atmospheric distortion plays a bigger role. That's all I have to offer. Don't know if it will help. Clear Skies!
I bought a C6-N f5 Newtonian at a pawn shop and the mirrors had micro-scratches from being clean with Windex and paper towel. It was for sale for $175 and I told the owner the mirrors had been screwed up and he face palmed and said he had cleaned the mirrors. Do not use paper towels to clean any kind of optics including sunglasses as they have abrasives in them. He dropped the price to $125 that included a Tele Vue 2x Barlow in the accessories. The Barlow was worth $125, but he wasn't aware or just needed the space. Optic Wave Laboratory had a sale of $88 to re-aluminize a 6" mirror and its secondary to 96-97% reflectivity. So I sent them in even though it still had a decent visual with the scratches. They tested my primary and said it was only .890 Strehl and had a 1/8th wave and they offered a refigure to a guaranteed .950 Strehl and 1/10th wave for $260 so I said go for it because I certainly couldn't afford a Takahashi. It came back with a .98 Strehl and 1/12th wave . The extra reflectivity alone was mind-blowing, but deep sky was great not to mention the planets with that Barlow. Guys in my astro-club said it had a better visual than their 8" scopes. I had to buy a Crayford focuser as the original rack and pinion had a little too much backlash and made the collimation go out a bit.
That is incredible! I wonder how good the reflectivity is of my “stock” mirrors. And would it be worth it to have them re-aluminized. I’ve never given it any thought. Now you have me thinking! Lol. Thanks for sharing your knowledge and experience. And thanks for watching and commenting!
@@adventuresofshadowdog They told me that typical stock mirrors run about 92% and better on SCT or MCTs, my Sky Watcher is 94%. But the sale is over and the bigger the mirrors the bigger the price. Still $88 for a 6", but it doesn't include the secondary about another $20. That said, if you're picking up Stephen's Quintet then your mirrors are at least 94%.
Hard target to capture at at local length (minor correction XT10g is 1200mm 1200 / 254 = 4.7), awesome job. Not just with the capture but with balancing that 30+lb ota on an EQ-G. Lots in the astro circles will say thats a bad combination. Ive ran a 254/1270 on an EQ6, but balance is key! Thanks for sharing.
Thanks so much for watching and commenting and for the correction. I agree with those that say the XT10g on an EQ-Q is not ideal. It isn’t. But as you pointed out, it is doable with good balancing and care. That is not my usual setup, but I’ve done it before for deep space objects and pulled it off. Much of what I’ve learned is from trial and error, as well as from other RUclipsrs and people who comment, etc. I find astrophotography to be a “team sport!” So much to learn from and share with each other. Thanks again!!!
Vinay, you are right!!!! Of all the views that this video has received, and all my proofing, YOU are the first to discover this error. I have since gone into the video and deleted the "295mm" comment. I wish I could insert the correct "250mm" wording, but once a video is posted, all I can do is cut and delete a part. So now at least the video is factually correct: 10" aperture. Thank you SO MUCH for bringing this to my attention in such a nice way. And thank you for watching and commenting. Have a great day!
Great video! I am also using an XT10 "dob" newt converted to a dovetail plate and rings, mounted on my EQ6R. No balance issues at all, the PA tracking error is
Thanks for watching and commenting. You are getting better tracking than I am! I could use a good lesson on improving tracking. I’m sure there’s a lot I can learn from you. I do use a Coma Corrector. Baader Planetarium MPCC Mark III Multi Purpose Coma Corrector Suitable for T-2 and M48. I really like the improved results around the edges of the image. Having said that, if the object being imaged is concentrated primarily in the center, then I find I really don’t need it. It prevents the elongation of the stars as the image approaches the edges. Chip size and ROI can make a difference too. I used my “DOB” for astrophotography for quite a while before I bought the Coma Corrector. I am glad I bought it and would recommend it. But I did manage to get some good images without it. Better with though. As to filters: I use CMOS Full Color One Shot cameras. I really love CMOS color cameras because it reduces the amount of time I need to spend on an image. Being that I do not have an observatory in my backyard, reduced time is really helpful. Plus, the chips are so good and so sensitive these days that I think we may have reached the tipping scale when compared to using Mono with multiple filters. BUT, I do use light pollution filters when I have to deal with it, like in my backyard. I have three. Each have unique strengths and weaknesses. They thread onto the end of the image train, which is fine because I’m not changing them once I’ve started imaging for the night. The three I use: 1. Sky Glow Imaging Filter by Orion. I use this when I’m dealing with minimal light pollution. It’s a great all around filter. But, if the light pollution is bad, then I use . . . 2. Optolong L-Pro-2. Incredible filter to use in heavy light polluted areas. If I could only have one, it would be this one. However, I prefer the results in low light polluted areas with #1. If I’m going after just Nebula, and I’m in a heavily light polluted area, I use . . . 3. Optolong Ultimate Dual 3nm Filter. This filter REALLY cuts out all light bands except the narrow ranges it lets through. Too much detail to type here so I’ll let you look up the bands it let’s through. But suffice it to say that it’s so narrow that even focusing using a bahtinov mask is a bit of a challenge. But what does come through really POPS. I find it’s only good on Nebula, not galaxies or even Star clusters. That has been my experience. I hope this helps. I’m still learning everyday, so please keep that in mind. I see your “tag” is @astro.falcon.vegas. Are you from the Vegas area? If so, we are close.
@Adventures of Shadow Wow! I swear our rigs are twins! I have the same filters but use an Apertura 2" comma instead of the Badder. I'm also using cmos with the ASI2600MC and use the ZWO 2" filter drawer. Balance is super important! It's not just the "balance" but how your scope is oriented in the mounting rings, where your focuser tube is, where your guide scope is mounted, and the weight of the cables that are hanging from the scope to the mount head or ground. From what I see in your video, you've got a lot of little things that you can do to improve your overall balance. Just bare with me as I give you some positive critiques... (REMOVE YOUR SCOPE FROM THE MOUNT) 1. You'll have to pull out your primary mirror assembly to access the back of the optical tube so you can remove the two "old" dob mounting disc's that are on the sides, which you don't use anymore. Then reinstall your primary mirror assembly and redo your collimation again. I used small pieces of electrical tape to cover the holes in the tube. 2. Rotate your optical tube inside the mounting rings so the focuser is "preferably" on the bottom pointing straight down as of it was in the mounts "home" position. It moves the focuser and image train weight to the center of gravity on that axis. (PLACE YOUR SCOPE ONTO YOUR MOUNT) 3. Remove your guide scope, and remove the small mounting plate from the front of your optical tube. Save for next step. At this point if you haven't already, you'll have to redo the balance of the optical tube inside the rings since the weights and angles have changed. Once you've repositioned your optical tube in the rings you'll find it balances out better than it did before. You also may have to adjust your counterweights as well. 4. Purchase a small vixen rail or plate that will fit on top of the two mounting rings (there should be holes on top of the rings to bolt to). Create an imaginary center line of your counterweight rod thru to the top of the optical tube and the vixen rail you installed. Mark it with tape for now and "guess" about where the balance point of your guide scope and guide camera is and line it up with the tape mark. Where ever the guide scope mounting bracket falls that's where you drill holes in the vixen rail to reuse the original bracket you removed from the front of the optical tube. Then install your guide scope on top. Again adjust your counterweights accordingly. (Make sure you guide camera is right side up so the tracking software knows which way is what) 5. At this point your rig should be perfectly balanced in any direction or orientation. Now grab your cables and use some cable management with zip ties and sleeves. Route the cables so you have a long enough loop to go from the bottom of your scope to top of your mount head. The more you can control your cables hanging about the less chances you'll have of a snag or too much cable weight pulling too much to one side or the other while tracking. Polar alignment needs to be precise! I don't know what apps you use or if you can even see Polaris. I use NINA and it's Three Point Polar Alignment tool, I can't see Polaris cause it's blocked by my house. This takes a little time and patience. Make sure your mounts tripod is as level in two directions as you can get it, this will insure your alignment won't be wonky. Try your best to get the RA and DEC numbers as close to 00.00.00 as you can. Anything greater than 00.00.50 total error will make your exposure times shorter due to elongated stars or even trailing. Ok, sorry, I'm done for now, good luck with what I gave you.
That was super ... good info and great pictures!!
Thanks Keith! I have a lot of fun making these videos and your kind comment means a lot to me.
Finally. Astrophotography that is accurate, natural looking, non distorted, and not color exaggerated. Good work!
Thanks for watching and commenting! Really appreciate it!
Nothing in astro is "natural looking". Our eyes can't stay open and accumulate light for hours at a time. The "color exaggerated" stuff you often see is usually just as accurate. Additionally, mapping of narrow bands of data to human-recognizable colors is a normal thing done by infrared, x-ray, and other types of telescopes. The data is real.
The brownish cast to the images here are more from light pollution than anything else. In a crisp winter sky at a dark site, there is a lot more color in the sky than you might think.
Thanks Pete for the informative comment. I will be completely honest with you. I am very much an amateur in this field. I use a one shot color CMOS camera and do fairly minimal post processing. I use Photoshop to stretch the image and fiddle with all the various settings until it looks about right. One thing I do not do is use the Hubble pallet or alter the colors. I think the previous comment might have been alluding to the use of the Hubble Pallet where the “natural” colors captured by the camera are changed to isolate the Hydrogen, Oxygen, etc. My understanding is that this is done primarily for scientific purposes, although the resulting images often look stunning. Feel free to educate me further as you are clearly further along the learning and mastering curve than I am. I think your comment addresses this topic quite well. But feel free to add more if you feel it would be helpful. Thanks again!
Loved the galaxy comparisons at the end
Thanks! Really appreciate the positive feedback.
Excellent. Your videos are terrific.
Thank you, Lester! Comments like yours are really appreciated and encouraging. Thanks for watching and commenting! Happy New Year!!!
Amazing!
Thank You for watching and commenting!
Very much enjoyed the video and the images were all wonderful!
Thank You! I enjoy making these videos and sharing them. Comments like yours make it all worthwhile. And Shadow is wagging his tail!
Nice capture.
Thanks Pete! Appreciate your watching and commenting.
Well done on the image, like the wall art you have a good collection there
Thanks Bill! Really appreciate the compliment and thank you for watching and commenting. The prints on the wall are photos I've taken over the years and are printed on metal. The metal medium really makes them pop. Highly recommend it. Lots of places on-line where you can print photos on metal. I use a local place.
Thanks again!
And the fact that you're looking back at them hundreds of millions of years in the past is insane
It really is mind boggling! I can’t pretend to be able to wrap my small brain around it all.
Thank you for watching and commenting.
really really really cool :)
Hey thanks NIck! Really appreciate you for watching and commenting.
Whoa nice. I have a 5 inch reflector and was blown away the first time I saw the Andromeda. And that too, visually. Didn't image it.
To think this is what 229mly looks like is exhilarating and motivating at the same time.
Thanks.
Thanks for watching and commenting.
Have you tried imaging yet? You can actually do some pretty good imaging with just a smart phone like an iPhone or Samsung. That’s how I started. Andromeda is doable with a 5” reflector and a smart phone. You will need to buy an attachment to hold your phone in place.
Thanks again!
Hey, can you tell me that even after collimating my telescope, to a degree which you can expect reasonably for a bird Jones design, why is it, that i have to pinpoint my focus right on when going for stars and clusters, while to see details on planets i have to go out of focus just slightly the other side?
Focusing accurately for planets gives me a concentrated picture, but one which is devoid of any details.
Is this due to bird Jones design?an inherent flaw?
I am kinda new to this hobby and looking for someone ahead of the curve to give me a bit of advice.
Thanks.
Interesting question. I have never owned or used a Bird Jones design. So, I do not know if the issue you are facing is related to the design and mirror difference vs a true Newtonian. However, I can tell you that I struggle with focus on planets. I can use a Bahtinov Mask to get precise focus on stars. But for planets, I have to rely on my eye and trying to get the visual as clear as possible. I find it much more difficult as the planet is moving and atmospheric distortion plays a bigger role.
That's all I have to offer. Don't know if it will help.
Clear Skies!
This is great! You're images are very nice, and for once, natural. Thank you
Thanks ASA! Means a lot coming from you!
Crazy you can see that far out in the galaxy
Hi Brad! I agree it is hard to wrap my mind around the distances involved! Thanks for watching and commenting!!!
Pretty damn good. Not too different than the one James Webb took, which is a testament to how good your telescope and astrophotography skills are
Wow! That is a real compliment!
Thanks for watching and commenting. Really appreciate it!
I don't have much to say ... I'm so proud of your excellent work in astrophotography and rockhounding.
Just a nice comment from you is all I need! Thanks and please keep in touch!
@@adventuresofshadowdog ... I promise to keep in touch :)
I bought a C6-N f5 Newtonian at a pawn shop and the mirrors had micro-scratches from being clean with Windex and paper towel. It was for sale for $175 and I told the owner the mirrors had been screwed up and he face palmed and said he had cleaned the mirrors. Do not use paper towels to clean any kind of optics including sunglasses as they have abrasives in them. He dropped the price to $125 that included a Tele Vue 2x Barlow in the accessories. The Barlow was worth $125, but he wasn't aware or just needed the space.
Optic Wave Laboratory had a sale of $88 to re-aluminize a 6" mirror and its secondary to 96-97% reflectivity. So I sent them in even though it still had a decent visual with the scratches. They tested my primary and said it was only .890 Strehl and had a 1/8th wave and they offered a refigure to a guaranteed .950 Strehl and 1/10th wave for $260 so I said go for it because I certainly couldn't afford a Takahashi. It came back with a .98 Strehl and 1/12th wave . The extra reflectivity alone was mind-blowing, but deep sky was great not to mention the planets with that Barlow. Guys in my astro-club said it had a better visual than their 8" scopes.
I had to buy a Crayford focuser as the original rack and pinion had a little too much backlash and made the collimation go out a bit.
That is incredible! I wonder how good the reflectivity is of my “stock” mirrors. And would it be worth it to have them re-aluminized. I’ve never given it any thought. Now you have me thinking! Lol.
Thanks for sharing your knowledge and experience. And thanks for watching and commenting!
@@adventuresofshadowdog They told me that typical stock mirrors run about 92% and better on SCT or MCTs, my Sky Watcher is 94%. But the sale is over and the bigger the mirrors the bigger the price. Still $88 for a 6", but it doesn't include the secondary about another $20.
That said, if you're picking up Stephen's Quintet then your mirrors are at least 94%.
Sorry for this late reply. Thanks for all this valuable information. Really appreciate it!
Hard target to capture at at local length (minor correction XT10g is 1200mm 1200 / 254 = 4.7), awesome job. Not just with the capture but with balancing that 30+lb ota on an EQ-G. Lots in the astro circles will say thats a bad combination. Ive ran a 254/1270 on an EQ6, but balance is key! Thanks for sharing.
Thanks so much for watching and commenting and for the correction. I agree with those that say the XT10g on an EQ-Q is not ideal. It isn’t. But as you pointed out, it is doable with good balancing and care. That is not my usual setup, but I’ve done it before for deep space objects and pulled it off. Much of what I’ve learned is from trial and error, as well as from other RUclipsrs and people who comment, etc. I find astrophotography to be a “team sport!” So much to learn from and share with each other.
Thanks again!!!
At 0:26 you mentioned 295mm which makes this an 11.6 inch mirror, or did I hear it wrong?
Vinay, you are right!!!! Of all the views that this video has received, and all my proofing, YOU are the first to discover this error. I have since gone into the video and deleted the "295mm" comment. I wish I could insert the correct "250mm" wording, but once a video is posted, all I can do is cut and delete a part. So now at least the video is factually correct: 10" aperture.
Thank you SO MUCH for bringing this to my attention in such a nice way. And thank you for watching and commenting.
Have a great day!
I saw the preview image and mistakenly read: "Going for Deep Space Nine"...
Hahaha! I'm a Trekky too so I can image that happening.
Thank You for watching and commenting!
Great video! I am also using an XT10 "dob" newt converted to a dovetail plate and rings, mounted on my EQ6R. No balance issues at all, the PA tracking error is
Thanks for watching and commenting. You are getting better tracking than I am! I could use a good lesson on improving tracking. I’m sure there’s a lot I can learn from you.
I do use a Coma Corrector. Baader Planetarium MPCC Mark III Multi Purpose Coma Corrector Suitable for T-2 and M48. I really like the improved results around the edges of the image. Having said that, if the object being imaged is concentrated primarily in the center, then I find I really don’t need it. It prevents the elongation of the stars as the image approaches the edges. Chip size and ROI can make a difference too. I used my “DOB” for astrophotography for quite a while before I bought the Coma Corrector. I am glad I bought it and would recommend it. But I did manage to get some good images without it. Better with though.
As to filters: I use CMOS Full Color One Shot cameras. I really love CMOS color cameras because it reduces the amount of time I need to spend on an image. Being that I do not have an observatory in my backyard, reduced time is really helpful. Plus, the chips are so good and so sensitive these days that I think we may have reached the tipping scale when compared to using Mono with multiple filters. BUT, I do use light pollution filters when I have to deal with it, like in my backyard. I have three. Each have unique strengths and weaknesses. They thread onto the end of the image train, which is fine because I’m not changing them once I’ve started imaging for the night. The three I use:
1. Sky Glow Imaging Filter by Orion. I use this when I’m dealing with minimal light pollution. It’s a great all around filter. But, if the light pollution is bad, then I use . . .
2. Optolong L-Pro-2. Incredible filter to use in heavy light polluted areas. If I could only have one, it would be this one. However, I prefer the results in low light polluted areas with #1. If I’m going after just Nebula, and I’m in a heavily light polluted area, I use . . .
3. Optolong Ultimate Dual 3nm Filter. This filter REALLY cuts out all light bands except the narrow ranges it lets through. Too much detail to type here so I’ll let you look up the bands it let’s through. But suffice it to say that it’s so narrow that even focusing using a bahtinov mask is a bit of a challenge. But what does come through really POPS. I find it’s only good on Nebula, not galaxies or even Star clusters. That has been my experience.
I hope this helps. I’m still learning everyday, so please keep that in mind. I see your “tag” is @astro.falcon.vegas. Are you from the Vegas area? If so, we are close.
@Adventures of Shadow Wow! I swear our rigs are twins! I have the same filters but use an Apertura 2" comma instead of the Badder. I'm also using cmos with the ASI2600MC and use the ZWO 2" filter drawer.
Balance is super important! It's not just the "balance" but how your scope is oriented in the mounting rings, where your focuser tube is, where your guide scope is mounted, and the weight of the cables that are hanging from the scope to the mount head or ground.
From what I see in your video, you've got a lot of little things that you can do to improve your overall balance. Just bare with me as I give you some positive critiques...
(REMOVE YOUR SCOPE FROM THE MOUNT)
1. You'll have to pull out your primary mirror assembly to access the back of the optical tube so you can remove the two "old" dob mounting disc's that are on the sides, which you don't use anymore. Then reinstall your primary mirror assembly and redo your collimation again. I used small pieces of electrical tape to cover the holes in the tube.
2. Rotate your optical tube inside the mounting rings so the focuser is "preferably" on the bottom pointing straight down as of it was in the mounts "home" position. It moves the focuser and image train weight to the center of gravity on that axis.
(PLACE YOUR SCOPE ONTO YOUR MOUNT)
3. Remove your guide scope, and remove the small mounting plate from the front of your optical tube. Save for next step. At this point if you haven't already, you'll have to redo the balance of the optical tube inside the rings since the weights and angles have changed. Once you've repositioned your optical tube in the rings you'll find it balances out better than it did before. You also may have to adjust your counterweights as well.
4. Purchase a small vixen rail or plate that will fit on top of the two mounting rings (there should be holes on top of the rings to bolt to). Create an imaginary center line of your counterweight rod thru to the top of the optical tube and the vixen rail you installed. Mark it with tape for now and "guess" about where the balance point of your guide scope and guide camera is and line it up with the tape mark. Where ever the guide scope mounting bracket falls that's where you drill holes in the vixen rail to reuse the original bracket you removed from the front of the optical tube. Then install your guide scope on top. Again adjust your counterweights accordingly. (Make sure you guide camera is right side up so the tracking software knows which way is what)
5. At this point your rig should be perfectly balanced in any direction or orientation. Now grab your cables and use some cable management with zip ties and sleeves. Route the cables so you have a long enough loop to go from the bottom of your scope to top of your mount head. The more you can control your cables hanging about the less chances you'll have of a snag or too much cable weight pulling too much to one side or the other while tracking.
Polar alignment needs to be precise! I don't know what apps you use or if you can even see Polaris. I use NINA and it's Three Point Polar Alignment tool, I can't see Polaris cause it's blocked by my house. This takes a little time and patience. Make sure your mounts tripod is as level in two directions as you can get it, this will insure your alignment won't be wonky. Try your best to get the RA and DEC numbers as close to 00.00.00 as you can. Anything greater than 00.00.50 total error will make your exposure times shorter due to elongated stars or even trailing.
Ok, sorry, I'm done for now, good luck with what I gave you.
@Adventures of Shadow yes I'm in Vegas, that was my Instagram
Sometime we should try to meet up! Maybe you can help me improve my guiding. And it’s always fun to make friends in the hobby.