The photographer is looking for generalized feedback about the aesthetic and technical qualities of their image.
Description
I tried for a twofer, staying up late hoping to see something good of the aurora, and had the tracker set to shoot this target, which wasn’t above the trees until almost 1 am. I was in and out from dark until after 1 am and never saw more than a very diffuse and unchanging reddish glow to the north, but got about 3 hours of acquisition on the nebula before it started getting light. I was pleased with the processing except that the focus is a bit soft on the stars, even though I had meticulously fine-tuned focus with a Bahtinov mask. Need to check that out. It has been a long dry spell for clear nights close to the new moon. We’ve had some wonderful clear skies close to the full moon.
Specific Feedback
Not everyone’s cup of tea, but I’m fascinated by what can be “seen” in the night sky with fairly basic equipment. No way nebulae like this can be seen visually. So I’m just tossing it out as, hey, there’s another world out there. Not a lot of artistic leeway in this stuff.
Technical Details
Trust me, you don’t want to know. Basically the telescope is a 400mm focal length refractor (basically a fine-tuned telephoto lens less expensive than some comparable wildlife lenses) and the sensor is APS-C sized in a cooled astro camera run at -10 deg F. (ZWO ASI2600MC Pro). About 3 hours of 2 minute exposures on a tracker. Processed in PixInsight.
Critique Template
Use of the template is optional, but it can help spark ideas.
It is amazing what relatively accessible equipment & techniques can pull out of deep sky. It is the stuff of imagination, terror and wonder. I remember when Hubble started sending stuff back and was fairly gobsmacked every time. Quite amazing and what dedication to one’s chosen subject - I start to fade away around 10pm!!
For anyone who is fascinated by what might be out there, the classic “Cosmos” by Carl Sagan is a great place to start. He was a master of many disciplines and they all fold together in this and his other books.
@Kris_Smith, I used to be good till 10:00 (later if it’s a party) but now it’s more like 9:00. The astro stuff is much more automated than it used to be in the old days (6-7 years ago) but some steps can be hands on after the target is above the trees, then I can go in the house and run and monitor from an iPad. But the whole thing can lead to lack of sleep.
When Ted would be away on an airline trip, our last cat knew she could get away with sleeping on the bed, but she felt she had to wait till I was there. One night I was up really late with some sort of Photohsop creation and she kept coming in and meowing at me that it was time to get to bed! She did it every 15 minutes until I finally told her it was OK, she could go ahead and I would be along shortly. She did.
Well your cat story cracked me up; it’s amazing the clocks our pets have.
This is just beautiful Diane. There are so many things I would love to play with in the future. A drone is probably next on the list, but astrophotography is on there as well. I admire your, and the others who post similar images here, skills, and appreciate your hard work!
Thanks, @John_Williams! I’ve been coveting a drone, too, but keep feeling I have enough toys. (I know how that always comes out, though…) Astrophotography is so much easier today that it was in the dark ages 6-7 years ago. The key piece of equipment now is an ASIAIR , a small on-board computer that runs the tracker and camera and does the most amazing things. You run it with a smartphopne or tablet. From the couch (or the sleeping bag), after initial rig setup. In the words of some stupid ad, all you need is a phone and a finger.
Thanks Diane, that reminds me of a question I have. I’ve thought about a star tracker for Milky Way photos, but do they require a view of the North Star for alignment? Here in the Cascades it is common that if I’m shooting the head of the MW the North Star is blocked by trees behind me.
Accurate polar alignment becomes more critical as you are shooting narrower fields of view. For the Milky Way you can come close enough with the compass and level on your smartphone. (Leveling the tracker base is also important and can be done with a small spirit level. The round dot level on the tracker is not very accurate.)
The last two eclipses I shot were at 400mm and I had to do daytime alignment for both, which was good enough, although I had to tweak the aim a couple of times during the partial phases. (In 2017 we were set up the night before at a friend’s place but it was cloudy. But it cleared the next morning, as predicted. Same last-minute clearing in 1998 and this year. Missing the aurora indicates I’ve used up my allotment of luck.)
For a wide-angle subject like the Milky Way you’re not exposing over a long time so slight drift can be at the pixel level. But if you’re shooting a small deep-sky object, even at 400mm, you will need to expose a long time to collect enough photons to stretch the histogram to bring out dim nebula detail without bringing out noise. You do that with hours of shorter exposures, and for that you need very accurate polar alignment, and guiding to correct for imperfect gears in the mount. But for those objects you don’t need to be out in a scenic location and can hopefully find a spot with a view to the north.
