![]() ...
·
![]() |
---|
Hi all. Whilst randomly browsing images in AstroBin I happened upon this one - https://astrob.in/agsyir/0/. I thought it might be worth sharing - following the discussion on Monday - as it gives an alternative take on the subject of exposure lengths. Not everybody will like the idea of the number of frames involved though, I'm sure! All the best Tim |
![]() ...
·
![]() |
---|
Well, that lot will slow up the PC. Blooming lovely result and shows it’s total integration time that is needed. Being sad I had to work the figures out. Ha 3.3 Hrs L 2.1 Hrs RGB 0.5 Hr each In rough numbers. 1.5 & 2 sec subs. No guiding needed. Didn’t see where it was taken. |
![]() ...
·
![]() |
---|
And presumably the short exposures would mean that a quite (very?) rough and ready polar alignment would suffice. Although a decently solid mount and an ability to track the target reasonably well would still be important. Does it offer you anything to chew on Keith??
|