Tuesday, 14 October 2008

M33 - Same data - New Method

Just been having a play with the M33 data that produced the post 9th October. Made some light flats using the same imaging setup and then combined with Deepskystacker.
The processing no longer required any gradient work so concentrated on producing better colour enhancing by shifting Photoshop into LAB mode. Here is a 100% crop of the same M33 stacked data.


Click for larger image

Labels: , , ,

4 Comments:

Anonymous Matthew Paver said...

Hi Phil,

I'm amazed by these photos with relatively standard kit. I was wondering if you could impart some advice. I'm just starting to take night sky shots and was hoping to get some mars, jupiter and galaxy shots. However, although I've had some successes, I get light trails. I can't afford an astrotrac right now and was wondering if you knew of a temporary measure to get better results.

My kit is a Nikon D700 and I have a Nikon 70-300mm lens.

Thanks for any help you can give.

Matt Paver
Pontefract

10 December 2008 12:38  
Blogger Phil Lowe said...

Hiya Matt:

Thanks for your comments. If you are wanting to get into astro photography then you need to have a good think about what area you would like to cover. For Planetary work you need to going down the route of long focal length where high f-numbers don't matter so much because of the relative brightness of the subject matter. For deep sky you need to gather as much light as possible and long exposures will become a must. My advice is to visit the UKAI forum at http://ukastroimaging.co.uk/forums/index.php

You have a long road ahead of you but you are in a good position. Basically spend no money until you are absolutely sure of what you want to do. I have spent thousands on astro gear but nothing has come close to the usability and value for money of the Astrotrac.

Be very wary of people who slag it off!

;-) Phil

16 December 2008 20:09  
Anonymous Matt Paver said...

Thanks for your insight Phil. I'll look further into the AstroTrac, and maybe moving somewhere where there is 100% light pollution ;)

Matt

17 December 2008 13:08  
Blogger Phil Lowe said...

Or "isn't".

;-)

19 December 2008 11:36  

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home