posted 01-03-2007 02:37 AM               

I've never had the patience (and money) to be an astrophotographer, so I'm glad that others suffer for my enjoyment. I have to be content to viewing through the eyepiece.

posted 01-03-2007 03:36 AM               

Cheers,
Matt

posted 01-03-2007 06:41 AM               

Thanks for sharing.

posted 01-03-2007 08:10 AM               

I made it the background on my desktop.

posted 01-03-2007 10:49 AM               

quote:

---

Originally posted by Chris Dubbs:
Tom,

I made it the background on my desktop.

Thanks.

---

That's one of the best compliments an astrophotographer can get!

Thanks for the comments. One of these days I'll get something good enough to get published in print, but I'm still working on that.
It's funny how the brightest objects in the sky are actually some of the hardest to capture just right. This image was actually made up of 18 different exposures. I did a couple at 1600 ISO, then the others were at 800 ISO. 2 minute exposures, 4 minute, and 5 minute, then stacked with Images Plus, tweaked and adjusted with Photoshop, and some noise reduction with Neat Image.
I've said it before, but the astrophotographer's biggest competition is him/her self! ;-)
(Actually, I don't know to many women that do this, my girlfriend usually stays out of the observatory when I'm imaging since she says get get irritable!)

Tom www.eastsideastro.org/observatory

posted 01-03-2007 11:18 AM               

quote:

---

Originally posted by nasamad:

To capture the light of something so beautiful, so well, from so far away is truly something to be proud of.

Well done........Adam

---

I really want to perfect a good image of Andromeda M31. Another bright object, but even if it's bright, it's a challenge to do well.

posted 01-03-2007 11:40 AM               

quote:

---

Originally posted by tegwilym:
I really want to perfect a good image of Andromeda M31. Another bright object, but even if it's bright, it's a challenge to do well.

Tom

---

Not only is M31 bright, but it's LARGE. Capturing the whole galaxy must be quite a challenge.

posted 01-04-2007 12:12 AM               

quote:

---

Originally posted by Lunatiki:
Tom, thats really great work. Have you ever done any planetary images? What do you image with?

Joel

---

Hi Joel,
Yes, I do planets also. See my web page under "Images --> Solar system" for that stuff. I do like doing Jupiter and Saturn, but yes, those are hard to do also. Mostly focusing and atmospheric stability is the trickiest part of that - as you well know!

For imaging, I use a 12" Meade LX200, an Orion 80ED Apo piggyback on top (the M42 was taken with the 80ED), autoguiding with a Meade DSI using MaxDSLR for the guiding software, primary imaging camera is a Canon 10D DSLR. So when I image with one scope, I put the DSI on the other and guide with it. So this M42 was guided with the big scope. Kind of overkill using such a big thing for autoguiding, but it works!

Someday I'll upgrade to a SBIG camera, but I've been very happy with the Canon for now.
www.eastsideastro.org/observatory

posted 01-04-2007 10:11 AM            

Comets, deep space, planetary and solar, you got it all covered.

posted 01-04-2007 10:35 AM               

quote:

---

Originally posted by Lunatiki:
we both imaged Mars at the same time it appears on October 22, 05 and captured the same big dust cloud.
http://marswatch.amaonline.com/10-22-050325.jpg

Comets, deep space, planetary and solar, you got it all covered.

Joel

---

Hey, that's pretty cool. Both got Mars the same night. I think you had much better seeing than I did though. Scope size makes no difference if you are looking through gunk!
One of my next targets - when skies decide to clear - is another good attempt at the Horsehead nebula. I am able to pull it out of the light pollution but I just need to take a LOT of exposures to work with to try getting it out of the noise. My Canon 10D is also non-modified - still has the IR filter in it - so I have a bit more challenge with the red nebulae, but I can pull them out with some work.
I'm always impressed with how much deep sky stuff I can pull out from living in the "red zone" of light pollution.
http://cleardarksky.com/lp/HlndsObWAlp.html?Mn=focuser

Tom

posted 01-04-2007 02:13 PM               

quote:

---

Originally posted by Chris Dubbs:
Tom,
Since I know zero about astrophotography, permit me some questions.
1) Some of the stars in your photo have a reddish cast and others don't. Why?
2) Two of the points of light directly above the nebula have a blue-ish halo. What causes that?

---

The red is probably caused by my adjusting the color of the nebula. Since my camera has the IR filter, a lot of the time nebulas come out looking blue since the red part is blocked or reduced. I then "cheat" a little bit and shift colors to make it look more like what we are familiar with seeing. Sometimes I end up changing star colors too.
I have a red/green colorblindness (slight) that often screws me up. You'll often see a bit too much purple in my planet images, but I don't notice it that much unless I stare at it a while. I'll never be an artist!

As for the blue halo around the stars at the top, that is actually another nebula called NGC1977 or "the running man".

Here is a larger view of the same image - http://www.eastsideastro.org/observatory/nebulas/M42-Dec9.jpg

Tom