A Review of Galaxy Season and OSC Processing

[@MrGuilletv]

Thanks for the video James. Waiting for the reducer backfocus video!

[@Aero19612]

Thanks for watching! I’ve got an “emergency” video to put out first, the we’ll discuss back focus again. Can’t seem to get away from that topic.

[@HeavenlyBackyardAstronomy]

Thanks for the video, James. Yup, clouds galore here in Savannah too. And now, it is so hot, it's hard to set up without getting soaking wet from sweat. Good looking galaxies. I particularly like that Leo Triplet. I liked that technique on how you eliminated that background noise. I just might have to try that too.

[@Aero19612]

Hey Pat, Agree. The Leo Triplet turned out best. I’ll go back and re-process the other galaxies. I’ve got plenty of room for improvement in my OSC/galaxy processing technique. I imagine your humidity situation is worse than mine here. I can take higher temps but, for me, the humidity is the killer. Try to stay “cool” as much as possible and make use of any clear skies you get! Thanks for watching!

[@anata5127]

This is superb video. Those are essential topics. I used to run DBE on RGB combined. Nowadays, I run on individual channels, and then again on combined RGB. I use massive square size (50-100) and high tolerance for RGB. Works much better. My FWHM gradually improved last 6-8 months. Now, I almost always get FWHM

[@Aero19612]

Haha! If I rejected all subframes with an eccentricity less than 0.5, I wouldn’t have any images. At the EQ6-R mount level, you’re gonna get eccentricity = 0.6 for long focal lengths. You have a high-end mount and are getting great results from it. Thanks for watching!

[@anata5127]

@@Aero19612 Yes, when I used tuned (by me) AVX, rejection threshold was 0.65. Now, if it is above 0.5, then it was wind >12-13 mph. Yes, mount is excellent. When I got it, Comec CEO told me “most simple to use mount”. Now, I understand what he meant. I suspect that it could have something else besides encoders.

[@robertosaragoni2218]

Awesome results

[@johnmacdougall4545]

What an interesting idea - take the stars from the 25% stack and the color from the 100% stack...thanks for opening up a completely logical and yet totally creative workflow

[@Aero19612]

Give it a try, John. Who knows, I may have just invented a new way to waste time and not produce better images. Let me know what you think if you give it a spin. Thanks for watching!

[@Dennis-tf2cs]

I had a light leak with my filter drawer as well. Just using electrical tape for now to block the leaks. Good information!! Thanks

[@Aero19612]

Hey Dennis. Do you have the older version of the ZWO filter drawer. They apparently re-designed it because of the light leakage. I have the newer one and, as it turns out, my gradient is not caused by light leakage. Might be a legit gradient. Just blast it with DynamicBackgroundExtraction and you're good to go.

[@MrDirtyRod]

Awesome info on running DBE on the individual OSC channels. I spent hours yesterday trying to solve that same problem with one of my images.

[@Aero19612]

Haha! Give it a shot and see if it helps you out. Thanks for watching!

[@Ronbo765]

Beautiful images

[@Aero19612]

It’s either those pictures or pictures of clouds. Much appreciated, but I’ve got a lot of work to do to improve my galaxy processing. Nice that the Antlia TriBand picks up the Ha, but it may lack in blue. Maybe I’ll get a chance to get some pics with the LPRO. Thanks for watching!

[@deep_space_dave]

I was happy I was able to catch the blue comet and the M101 supernova. Now that I have a mono camera I was able to get the Cygnus Loop but now been cloudy (and smokey) ever since! That's a great idea to split the channels to fix the odd gradient! Hope the conditions are better where you are as I am still waiting near Chicago! Thanks and Clear Skies!

[@Aero19612]

Thanks for watching, Dave! Yeah, that darn gradient was giving me fits until I realized that you have to split the image into its colors to deal with it. Had some good skies for about 2 weeks. Under clouds and wind now and for the next few days. But no smoke! I think…

[@timmoody7600]

Can you say why you prefer the 294MC to the 2600MC. (I have both, but tend to use the 2600). What exposure do you use, always the 200 seconds at gain 122?

[@Aero19612]

@@timmoody7600 I wouldn’t say I prefer the 294 to the 2600. Starting from scratch, I’d probably go with the 2600 for the larger bit depth and sensor size. I bought the 294 because the sensor size is compatible with the diameter of filters I have. If I went with the 2600, I’d have to buy larger filters and larger filter drawer/filter wheel = $$$. Exposure is a balance of competing issues, many unique to your sky brightness and frequency of satellite and aircraft trails. Longer exposures don’t buy more detail relative to short exposures for the same total exposure time. If you go too short, the read noise can bite you. I like as long exposures as I can get away with to reduce space on the hard drive and post processing, but I don’t go much longer than just getting the low end tail of the exposure histogram off the left edge. Software generally handles satellite trails ok, but I also get big jet landing lights from time to time given that I live in the landing path of DFW airport. Those are a killer. Those might be a limiting consideration for darker skies, but my skies are pretty bright.

[@timmoody7600]

@@Aero19612 thanks for the response. I upgraded my 294 to 2600 for my Esprit 100 and have had better results and no amp glow, but with the new HD 9.25 I find I'm not getting as much signal. Granted we have a full moon and I have Bortle 8+. I'm thinking about getting a 2400 to have the large pixels, but I also have the ZWO filter drawer, so maybe I won't be able to use the extra pixels. I have a CEM40 which is lighter than your EQ6-R, and my guiding is not as good as with the Esprit 100.

[@kevinburke8608]

With DBE, you may want to reduce the smoothing factor with that many sample points so that the gradient removal is a bit more aggressive. It may be better at taking out the variations over shorter distances across the image. It's using a spline fitting for the gradient.

[@Aero19612]

Hey Kevin, Yeah, it’s always a balance between smooth background model and a more aggressive model that might take some of your target away. So far, I’m leaning toward a smooth model, bit different images often require different approaches. Thanks for watching!

[@kevinburke8608]

Like your vids, we have a similar equipment path and I have to understand "the why" to learn things which you go over very well.@@Aero19612

[@jesuschrist2284]

At least siril stacks clouds for me

[@Aero19612]

The most useful feature ever, haha