 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
| HomeDiscussion GroupsSpace ScienceAstronomyAmateur AstronomySpace FlightSpace StationShuttleSpace HistorySpace PolicySETI SpaceKB.com Contact UsLink To UsSearch & Site Map |
Space Forum / Amateur Astronomy / November 2004First light 18" Lunar and Saturn images
Hi, I was fortunate to have good seeing during first light 11/05/04 with my 18" Starmaster and I though some of you might be interested in seeing some of the images, see link below http://higginsandsons.com/astro/ All the images were taken using a 4X Powermate, the lunar images were taken with a DMK-21F04 firewire camera and the Saturn image was taken with a Toucam Pro. If anyone has any questions about the imaging specifics I will glad to answer them. Thanks, Wes Higgins Wes Higgins: > I was fortunate to have good seeing during first light > 11/05/04 with my 18" Starmaster and I though some of you might [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > If anyone has any questions about the imaging specifics I will glad > to answer them. And we are fortunate that you posted this! Let me get this straight, though -- did you make these images with your telescope, or did you actually travel to the Moon and Saturn and photograph them up close!? Davoud  Signatureusenet *at* davidillig dawt com Davoud, Thanks, no they were all taken from my back yard at an elevation of no more than 1000 feet above sea level :>) Wes Higgins >Wes Higgins: >> I was fortunate to have good seeing during first light [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > >Davoud Wes, congratulations on your excellent "first light" imaging, taken from your back yard. For reference, is your backyard located just a few miles outside New York City or Chicago or LA, or is it in a fairly remote area? In other words, how far from significant light pollution are you? Jim Cate > Davoud, > [quoted text clipped - 21 lines] >> >>Davoud >>For reference, is your backyard located just a few miles outside New York City or Chicago or LA, or is it in a fairly remote area? In other words, how far from significant light pollution are you?>> Light pollution has no effect on Lunar/planetary imaging. Zero, nada. Roland Christen You are dead, dead wrong. It has "less" effect, but it doesn't have "no" effect. Jim >>>For reference, is your backyard located just a few miles outside New York > [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > > Roland Christen > You are dead, dead wrong. It has "less" effect, but it doesn't have "no" > effect. > > Jim Better quit while you are still behind... SignatureJan Owen To reach me directly, remove the Z, if one appears in my e-mail address... Latitude: 33.662 Longitude: -112.3272 > > >>>For reference, is your backyard located just a few miles outside New York [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > > > > Roland Christen Actually, Jan, I rather enjoy these discussions. But to minimize wasted time, there's no question that planetary imaging, even inclusing visual observation of the planets, is less affected by light pollution than imaging (or observations)of faint DSOs. It's also true that filters, and digital imaging, can minimize the effects of poor conditions in populated areas, and, in fact, that good images, even of DSOs, can be obtained under conditions in which you can't even see the objects visually, which of course is one of the advantages of digital imaging. - However, that doesn't mean that imaging of Saturn, Uranus, Mercury, etc. under very poor viewing conditions, at high magnification, could produce the same results as could be obtained under very dark skies, all other factors being equal, e.g., in which the same 18-inch optics, the same imaging EQUIPMENT, and the same processing TECHNIQUES were used. The key to my issue with Chris'note is his use of the term "no", as in: "NO effect." Jim >>You are dead, dead wrong. It has "less" effect, but it doesn't have "no" >>effect. >> >>Jim > > Better quit while you are still behind... > Actually, Jan, I rather enjoy these discussions. But to minimize wasted > time, there's no question that planetary imaging, even inclusing visual [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] > > Jim Apparently you don't know who "Chris" is, or know what his qualifications are... It sounds like you are more interested in winning your (dubious) point than whether your point is correct. Sorry; I'll go with Roland "Chris"ten, of Astro Physics, thank you... Ahhh, well... SignatureJan Owen To reach me directly, remove the Z, if one appears in my e-mail address... Latitude: 33.662 Longitude: -112.3272 > > >>You are dead, dead wrong. It has "less" effect, but it doesn't have "no" [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > > > Better quit while you are still behind... >> Actually, Jan, I rather enjoy these discussions. But to minimize wasted >> time, there's no question that planetary imaging, even inclusing visual [quoted text clipped - 24 lines] > >Ahhh, well... There used to be an old myth that planets looked best under still dewey conditions. While it's true that a steady image is better than an unsteady one, sometimes contrast is washed out by the diffusion of city lights into the water vapour in the air under those conditions. But, it has to be pretty severe to notice this. -Rich One more time, Jan. The statement with which I took issue was to the effect that: Light pollution has NO effect on Lunar/planetary imaging. - NADA.-- This would include imaging of faint planets such as Uranus at powers of 800 or greater, and would include extremes of light polution such as seen in the highly light-polluted Houston area compared with excellent conditions such as are sometimes experienced in west Texas, etc. Jim >>Actually, Jan, I rather enjoy these discussions. But to minimize wasted >>time, there's no question that planetary imaging, even inclusing visual [quoted text clipped - 24 lines] > > Ahhh, well... >One more time, Jan. The statement with which I took issue was to the >effect that: Light pollution has NO effect on Lunar/planetary imaging. - >NADA.-- Get over it. It was just casual use of language. Mountains and molehills. Incidentally, there is an argument that a brighter background sky *helps* with observing brighter planets: the reduced contrast between the planet and background is easier on the eye. Tim SignatureFoo. >>This would include imaging of faint planets such as Uranus at powers of 800 or greater, and would include extremes of light polution such as seen in the highly light-polluted Houston area compared with excellent conditions such as are sometimes experienced in west Texas, etc.>> Light pollution doesn't change detail seen on planets, even Uranus. I've pulled 19th mag stars out of a severely light polluted sky right here in the middle of an industrial park, 1/2 mile from an incredibly illuminated shopping center where you can get sunburned at midnight if you stay under the parking lot lights too long ;>)) What's important is STEADY skies, and sometimes you can find them right downtown where the sky is milky white. In fact, the best seeing around here occurs before the Sun has fully set and NO stars are visible - talk about the ultimate light polluter. The air gets incredibly steady for about half an hour most nights and you can see or record very minute detail on planets. I was able to image detail on Mercury on just such an evening. Maybe you're mixing up light pollution with fog or mist in the air. That is another item altogether. Roland Christen >>>This would include imaging of faint planets such as Uranus at powers of >>> [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > >What's important is STEADY skies, and sometimes you can find them right Roland, >downtown where the sky is milky white. In fact, the best seeing around here >occurs before the Sun has fully set and NO stars are visible - talk about the There is a smirk on my face as I read your statement here. I have experienced precisely the same thing MANY times. In fact, many of my best views of the moon are approximately 20 minutes after the sun has dipped below the horizon with still lots of light outside but the moon seems very steady for imaging. Anthony. >ultimate light polluter. The air gets incredibly steady for about half an hour >most nights and you can see or record very minute detail on planets. I was able [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] >Roland Christen > Well, I tried, as did folks with experience well beyond mine, so I guess you just elected yourself outta' here. PLONK! SignatureJan Owen To reach me directly, remove the Z, if one appears in my e-mail address... Latitude: 33.662 Longitude: -112.3272 > One more time, Jan. The statement with which I took issue was to the > effect that: Light pollution has NO effect on Lunar/planetary imaging. - [quoted text clipped - 35 lines] > > > > Ahhh, well... > Actually, Jan, I rather enjoy these discussions. But to minimize wasted > time, there's no question that planetary imaging, even inclusing visual [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] > > Jim Also, for your continuing education, you might want to peruse this: http://www.astro-physics.com/gallery/gallery.htm Especially the area called Artists of the Night Skies, or words to that effect. Perhaps, after that, you will be more equipped to understand whether or not "Chris" knows what he's talking about... SignatureJan Owen To reach me directly, remove the Z, if one appears in my e-mail address... Latitude: 33.662 Longitude: -112.3272 > > >>You are dead, dead wrong. It has "less" effect, but it doesn't have "no" [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > > > Better quit while you are still behind... Thanks Jim, My back yard is located about five miles outside of Tecumseh Oklahoma, a very small town. Wes Higgins >Wes, congratulations on your excellent "first light" imaging, taken from >your back yard. For reference, is your backyard located just a few [quoted text clipped - 29 lines] >>> >>>Davoud >Davoud, > [quoted text clipped - 20 lines] >> >>Davoud Wes, What are you using for tracking? Tom T. Wow! Great shots Davoud! Clear Skies Chuck Taylor Do you observe the moon? Try http://groups.yahoo.com/group/lunar-observing/ And the Lunar Picture of the Day http://www.lpod.org/ ************************************ > Wes Higgins: > > I was fortunate to have good seeing during first light [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > > Davoud > Wow! > > Great shots Davoud! I meant Wes but was looking at the previous reply rather than the original post. My apologies to both. :-( Chuck Taylor Do you observe the moon? Try http://groups.yahoo.com/group/lunar-observing/ And the Lunar Picture of the Day http://www.lpod.org/ ************************************ > Clear Skies > [quoted text clipped - 21 lines] > > > > Davoud great pix. you're gonna have a lot of fun with that scope. clear skies, zaph Thanks everyone for the comments, as everyone knows the seeing is at least 95% of it Thanks, Wes Higgins. >great pix. you're gonna have a lot of fun with that scope. > > clear skies, > > zaph >Hi, > [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > >Wes Higgins The shot of Clavius is so amazing I think I see the black obelisque!!! Terrific work! That was TMA-1 in Tycho Clavius was the (logical) location of the Moonbase. Clearskies! Orion > >Hi, > > [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] > The shot of Clavius is so amazing I think I see the black obelisque!!! > Terrific work! > Hi, > [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > > Wes Higgins Hi Wes, Just when I thought I was getting somewhere with this imaging lark, you go and post something like this... truly exceptional. How many frames are we talking about here for your Saturn image? Well done, and please keep them coming! --Steve Steve, The Saturn image is 830 frames from 1800. Thanks, Wes Higgins >> Hi, >> [quoted text clipped - 23 lines] > >--Steve Hi Wes, Very good immages! I have one question: have you retouched the Saturn image with Paint Shop Pro or simmilar? If yes, what have you done. Thanks, John Lewis. > Hi, > [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > > Wes Higgins John, Thanks, The Saturn image was stacked in K3CCDtools (the lunar images were stacked in Registax) , I used some unsharp mask in K3CCD and did some adjustment of the levels in Adobe Photoshop Ver7, I made no adjustments at all to the colors, large aperture brings out the rich colors of the planets . Wes Higgins >Hi Wes, > [quoted text clipped - 21 lines] >> >> Wes Higgins Wes Higgins dropped in with this bombshell assortment: > All the images were taken using a 4X Powermate, the > lunar images were taken with a DMK-21F04 firewire camera > and the Saturn image was taken with a Toucam Pro. > If anyone has any questions about the imaging specifics I will glad > to answer them. You suck! (but in a good way.) Even my AF camera doesn't achieve that level of critical focus quality when taking a snapshot of a tree in daylight at 30'. I'll echo the request for more details on the Saturn image and now put any plans on astro imaging on permanent hold. You da man, Mr. Higgins. And this from a first light. In the future just bypass the middlemen and send everything you do directly to the S&T photo editor. Signature-John Steinberg email: not@thistime.invalid Thanks John and everyone, The Saturn image is a stack of 830 frames from 1800 , stacked in K3CCDtools, processed with un-sharpmask in K3CCD and levels adjusted in Adobe Photoshop Ver7, the lunar images were stacked in Registax. I have some more images to process from that night, it may be awhile before I get seeing this good again though. Thanks, Wes Higgins >Wes Higgins dropped in with this bombshell assortment: > [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] >And this from a first light. In the future just bypass the middlemen >and send everything you do directly to the S&T photo editor. > Hi, > [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > If anyone has any questions about the imaging specifics I will glad > to answer them. Hi Wes: Some of the nicest images I've seen in a while, particularly your Copernicus. Peace, Rod > Hi, > [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > > Wes Higgins Congratulations, Wes! This first light is definitely the best I ever saw or know. Clavius is the most detailed lunar image taken by amateur I saw so far. Keep coming! Valery Deryuzhin Hi Wes, Again, apologies on my screwing up the names. May I post this link in the lunar observing group? There are a number of people there who would enjoy your pictures. Also, have you submitted any to LPOD? Clear Skies Chuck Taylor Do you observe the moon? Try http://groups.yahoo.com/group/lunar-observing/ And the Lunar Picture of the Day http://www.lpod.org/ ************************************ > Hi, > [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > > Wes Higgins Hi Chuck, Thanks, sure I would be glad to have you post a link in the Lunar Observing group. I submitted the Longomontanus image to LPOD and it was an LPOD a few days ago. Thanks, Wes Higgins >Hi Wes, > [quoted text clipped - 29 lines] >> >> Wes Higgins > Hi Chuck, > > Thanks, sure I would be glad to have you post a link in the > Lunar Observing group. > I submitted the Longomontanus image to LPOD and it was an > LPOD a few days ago. My first thought is congratulations. It is a *great* shot! Of course, my second thought is embarrassment because I usually check the LPOD and rarely miss a day. My third thought was extreme embarassement, because I did see it, and didn't remember it. It could be the rotation, but is more probably due to the fact that as I get older, my forgetter is the only part of me that works better than it used to. Great shots! ;-) Chuck Taylor (aging faster than I thought!) Do you observe the moon? Try http://groups.yahoo.com/group/lunar-observing/ And the Lunar Picture of the Day http://www.lpod.org/ ************************************ > Thanks, > [quoted text clipped - 33 lines] > >> > >> Wes Higgins You must be a satisfied customer, as well as a comptent user. Thank you for sharing - its superb and more++. Wow! Mark > Hi, > [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > > Wes Higgins Please post these over to abp.astro ? If you havent already. I know people there who sometimes dont read this group would love to share in your achievement. Thanks. Mark > Hi, > [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > > Wes Higgins Wes, I am interested in the camera you used any special setup? > Hi, > [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > > Wes Higgins The lunar images were taken with a DMK-21F04 Firewire video camera imaging at 30FPS uncompressed , see link below: http://www.1394imaging.com/products/cameras/dmk21f04/ Thanks, Wes Higgins >Wes, I am interested in the camera you used any special setup? > [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] >> >> Wes Higgins >>The lunar images were taken with a DMK-21F04 Firewire video camera imaging at 30FPS uncompressed , see link below: http://www.1394imaging.com/products/cameras/dmk21f04/ How did you achieve color since this is a monochrome camera? Roland Christen Roland, When I put together the web page I forgot to say that Saturn was imaged with a Toucam Pro, my original post to Sci Astro stated that Saturn was imaged with the Toucam, sorry for the over sight. Thanks, Wes Higgins >>>The lunar images were taken with a DMK-21F04 Firewire video >camera imaging at 30FPS uncompressed , see link below: [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > >Roland Christen >>When I put together the web page I forgot to say that Saturn was imaged with a Toucam Pro, my original post to Sci Astro stated that Saturn was imaged with the Toucam, sorry for the over sight.>> Would you get a sharper Saturn image with the other camera? Roland Christen Roland, Yes I think I would get a sharper image with the DMK-21F04 , the monochrome DMK uses all the pixels and has no Bayer filter, I know I'm not saying anything that you don't already know :>). I would like to find a color filter array that will fit between the camera and barlow that is thin enough to allow everything to work correctly. Thanks, Wes Higgins >>>When I put together the web page I forgot to say that >Saturn was imaged with a Toucam Pro, my original post [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > >Roland Christen >>Yes I think I would get a sharper image with the DMK-21F04 , the monochrome DMK uses all the pixels and has no Bayer filter, I know I'm not saying anything that you don't already know :>). I would like to find a color filter array that will fit between the camera and barlow that is thin enough to allow everything to work correctly.>> What you may need is two scopes, one taking monochrome at high resolution and the other taking color information, which is then later combined into the first image. Do you have 4 arms? Roland Christen Roland, I have two scopes, the 18" Starmaster and a 14" Starmaster I also have two computers but I don't have four arms and two brains :>) I guess I could work out a barlow combination that would get close to the same image scale for both cameras , would the image scale have to be exact for both images or just close and be re sized later? Thanks, Wes Higgins >>>Yes I think I would get a sharper image with the DMK-21F04 , the >monochrome DMK uses all the pixels and has no Bayer filter, I [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > >Roland Christen >> would the image scale have to be exact for both images or just close and be re sized later>> I think they could be resized later. Programs like the new Maxim will rotate and resize an image. Roland Christen > Hi, > [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > > Wes Higgins One word: SUPERB! SignatureJan Owen To reach me directly, remove the Z, if one appears in my e-mail address... Latitude: 33.662 Longitude: -112.3272 |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2008 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.