AstroBin

AstroBin

AstroBin

Data quality? [Deep Sky] Processing techniques · Sean Mc · ... · 5 · 210 · 0

smcx 3.61
Sean Mc
...
· 
·  Share link
Figured I would shoot some subs last night even though the sky transparency was garbage due to humidity. 

(on a side note, I think I saw a meteor that was head on to me!  I looked up to see if I could find polaris, and there was a bright flash about the size of the moon due to the haze. Grew and faded over the course of 1.5 seconds)

Anyway… is it worth it to stack the narrowband subs even if they are not the best quality?  Stars were round and a decent apparent size at less than 2”, but perhaps the nebula detail wasn’t optimal. 

thx again!
Like
×

Sorry :-(

Editing a post is only allowed within 24 hours after creating it.
×

Share this forum post

Copy the URL below to share a direct link to this post.

Close
×

Post editing not available

This post cannot be edited using the classic forums editor.

To edit this post, please enable the "New forums experience" in your settings.

Go to Settings Close
jhayes_tucson 26.84
John Hayes
...
· 
·  1 like
·  Share link
Low transmission in the atmosphere simply decreases the signal.   You can stack the data you got to see how it looks but it won’t be as good as it could be under clear skies.  I personally toss out data taken under a thin over cast.

John
Like
×

Sorry :-(

Editing a post is only allowed within 24 hours after creating it.
×

Share this forum post

Copy the URL below to share a direct link to this post.

Close
×

Post editing not available

This post cannot be edited using the classic forums editor.

To edit this post, please enable the "New forums experience" in your settings.

Go to Settings Close
CCDnOES 8.34
Bill McLaughlin
...
· 
·  1 like
·  Share link
John Hayes:
You can stack the data you got to see how it looks but it won’t be as good as it could be under clear skies.  I personally toss out data taken under a thin over cast.

John

Same for me. The more I image, the more frames I tend to reject totally (as opposed to weighting them and using them). Normally I would not use that sort of frame at all these days.

Humidity not always bad, of course. At my remote site in California some of the best seeing often happens as the marine layer starts to intrude and that can give you fantastic seeing just before the transparency goes to zero (aka fog).

Last night was even better since the marine layer came in but w/o fog and it resulted in the best seeing I have ever noted with the last part of the night mostly under an arcsec and a brief minimum recorded by the monitor at an incredible .51 arcsec...
Like
×

Sorry :-(

Editing a post is only allowed within 24 hours after creating it.
×

Share this forum post

Copy the URL below to share a direct link to this post.

Close
×

Post editing not available

This post cannot be edited using the classic forums editor.

To edit this post, please enable the "New forums experience" in your settings.

Go to Settings Close
Gondola 8.11
Tony Gondola
...
· 
·  Share link
Laminar flow, gotta love it…
Like
×

Sorry :-(

Editing a post is only allowed within 24 hours after creating it.
×

Share this forum post

Copy the URL below to share a direct link to this post.

Close
×

Post editing not available

This post cannot be edited using the classic forums editor.

To edit this post, please enable the "New forums experience" in your settings.

Go to Settings Close
Vinnyvent84 0.00
Vinny Vent
...
· 
·  1 like
·  Share link
I think it depends. I discard blatantly bad subs when I blink each morning. But you have to keep in perspective your average local conditions. I live in NYC, Bortle 8/9, few miles from a coastline, in the winter all the closely condensed houses are radiating heat off their roofs, conversely in the summer all the concrete sidewalks and paved street and radiating heat off from the daytime at night. 

When using apps like Astropheric and the likes - my seeing and transparency is below average probably 50-60% of the time (maybe more). So if I asked to filter out all subs taken in below average transparency conditions and then factor in my relatively small horizon I have to work with in my yard, factor in cloudy and rainy days I would basically only image 15 days a year. 

So long story short - blatantly bad subs I blink out and then after a few hours of data on each channel I’ll do a FBPP to see how the data is looking.
Like
×

Sorry :-(

Editing a post is only allowed within 24 hours after creating it.
×

Share this forum post

Copy the URL below to share a direct link to this post.

Close
×

Post editing not available

This post cannot be edited using the classic forums editor.

To edit this post, please enable the "New forums experience" in your settings.

Go to Settings Close
Gondola 8.11
Tony Gondola
...
· 
·  3 likes
·  Share link
I think that it's important to say that working with thin data will force you to become better at the processing end of the game and that's not a bad thing. Not to take anything away from folks who have perfect conditions but getting a decent image out of data that's not the best takes a lot of skill compared to images with days of integration time, perfect stars and so on.
Like
×

Sorry :-(

Editing a post is only allowed within 24 hours after creating it.
×

Share this forum post

Copy the URL below to share a direct link to this post.

Close
×

Post editing not available

This post cannot be edited using the classic forums editor.

To edit this post, please enable the "New forums experience" in your settings.

Go to Settings Close
 
Register or login to create to post a reply.
×

Warning!

This operation will reload the current page. If you have any unsaved information in a form, it will be lost.

You can also dismiss this window, and your operation will be applied at the next page navigation.