Deminishing returns.....

Started 3 months ago | Discussions thread
OP Kemo-sabe Junior Member • Posts: 39
Re: Deminishing returns.....

jasonm10 wrote:

Kemo-sabe wrote:

Astrozoid, you are correct in your analysis. The images were shot in Bortle 9 sky and consist of 193 5 minute subs with a Canon FD 800mm f5.6l lens with a Canon 5D MKIII at iso400 incorporating an Optolong L-eNhance dou-band 2" drop-in filter. My guide scope consist of a DIY Canon FD 300mm f4.0l lens coupled to a QHY5LII-C guide camera. The Mount is an iOptron CEM25P with ADM side by side saddle and iPolar scope for polar alignment. I have Pegasus power distribution for the mount/equipment and dual Pegasus focus controllers for remote focusing the primary optics and guide-scope.

I am a newbie to processing astro images. It has has taken me more than 1 year to automate and dial-in the hardware software aspects of astro imaging and learn the nuances of the system.

However, astro processing is another story. I was to embarrassed by my pitiful results to post such a sad image in the light of so many awesome images that I have seen on this forum. Pride is a terrible thing.

My son suggested that I post the image to see if I could get some advice and input on what I am doing wrong in my processing workflow. Or, is this the best that one might expect from Bortle 9 skies with the optical equipment I am using or a combination of both?

I am using Clarke's methodology of in camera dark frame extraction for the subs. Using Clarke's Methodology the subs actually take 10 minutes to shoot per sub. I use Sequator and/or DSS for stacking. PS RC-Astro filter GradientXterminator to remove gradients. Then RNC stretch or PS to stretch. StarTools or DxO PhotoLab4 Post Processing.

I have been experimenting with Canon's DPP4 RAW processor to process and convert the RAW subs to TIFF prior to stacking with varying results. In an attempt to pull more fine detail from the subs.

Then it's in your post work. Maybe 193 exposures still isn't enough even at 5 minutes? But had you typed this first - "The images were shot in Bortle 9 sky and consist of 193 5 minute subs" instead of leaving everyone guessing, I'm sure you would have gotten a lot more positive responses with constructive suggestions.

Not everyone knows the abbreviations around the world and photo nomenclature and as I've learned the hard way, if you're not utterly brutally concise and obvious with full words, people will totally take the wrong cues. It's human nature of the forum world.

Please, do not take this personally. Just a heads up.

And inexperience and wanting to learn isn't a pitfall. It's not learning from your mistakes that is the pitfall. Don't give it up.

Hold on a minute. In my OP I used the same shorthand that everyone else does on this forum in the astro threads.

When I witnessed the confusion of seconds vs minutes I knew it was necessary to write out my shooting parameters long hand to eliminate the confusion.

It has not been established or proven that it is a result of post processing from my perspective. That is why I have tried post a link to the stacked image so more experience astrophotographers can analyze the data and determine that, "son you don't know how to process the images or that is best you will be able to do from Bortle 9 skies with the optics that you are using."

I am here to learn not to be insulted.

Post (hide subjects) Posted by
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow