Andromeda Galaxy

Messages
3,817
Name
Carl
Edit My Images
Yes
Recently I've become interested in taking images of deep-sky objects, and have spent quite a few hours trying to learn about it (plus countless hours on YouTube!). I began by taking a few stationary images on a tripod in the garden with my Fuji X-T2 and 100-400mm lens, and stacking them into one image. I quickly learned that stacking 100 single 0.5-second images doesn't give you much data to play with, and it takes an absolute age to process. At 400mm the only way to get longer exposures is to use an equatorial mount to counter the rotation of the earth. I don't want to invest in a full-sized EQ mount yet so I went halfway and bought myself a star tracker.

I ventured out last night to a quiet car park on a nearby hill, away from the light pollution of my town, and took some images. It was nice and dark and I was able to get 31 minutes of exposure in total. Processing the images is a steep learning curve, but I've managed to get something I'm really happy with. 2 weeks ago my first image was a muddy brown sky with just a white dot for the centre of the core. I feel like astrophotography is going to be a bit of a rabbit hole!

Fuji X-T2
Fuji 100-400 f/f.6
Giottos carbon fibre tripod
iOptron Skyguider Pro.

31 x 60 second light images = 31 mins total exposure
9 x 60 second darks
10 x bias
No flats

Stacked in DSS and processed in PS.

Andromeda 3.jpg
 
Excellent, well worth the effort ;)
 
So I've posted this image on Reddit too, and the feedback I got was that I wasn't pushing the image to it's full potential in terms of processing. The original was a bit murky, so I've taken it back into PS and given it a good thrashing. I think I've got something with a bit more punch to it now, but I'm still cautious about going too far with it!

Andromeda 3-2 small.jpg
 
With 31 min exposure time you probably could do better, however.............
What was your iso? I have an image taken with the Sigma 150-600mm at 800 iso with just 7 min exposure, a mix of 25 s and one 40s, which shows more detail. But it was taken in the middle of winter when the sky was both darker and cleaner. The sky is pretty mucky and moist right now. It was also integrated in PixInsight, which knocks the socks off DSS, but then it should do because DSS is free and PI most definitely isn't! Actually I need to do it again as I was at the very bottom of the extremely steep learning curve that is PI, and it shows. Now I'm about on the 1st rung! For an early effort I'd say not too shabby at all. You can see in the reprocessed one you're getting a bit of unwanted skyglow showing which will only get worse if you try to push it. It's very easy to go too far with astro. If you haven't already done so you may be able to use a gradient tool in PS to clean up the background. Sorry, I don't use PS either. I'm a PaintShop Pro user (well, someone has to be........... ;))
If galaxies were of uniform brightness it would all be so much easier. It's all too easy to burn out the core trying to get the fainter detail, but you haven't done that.
The rabbit hole is as deep as you want to make it and some people get a very long way down and still don't find the bottom. My rabbit is a Mediterranean surface dweller............
 
Good one Carl, and you have also picked up M110 too. From what I read astrophotography makes what we spend on 'ordinary' photography look like chicken feed.

DAve
 
Good one Carl, and you have also picked up M110 too. From what I read astrophotography makes what we spend on 'ordinary' photography look like chicken feed.

DAve
M32 and M110, aka NGC205. M32 is the bright one close in below and right of M31's core, with NGC205 (looking more obviously like a galaxy) top centre of the image, just for anyone who doesn't know. They're both easily visible in small telescopes.
 
If anyone want to have a go at some simple astrophotography the Milky Way is in a good position as seen from the UK just now.

It cuts the southern horizon at a steep angle and is visible(given a dark enough site and good seeing conditions) from early on in the night.

Saturn and Jupiter are also visible for part of the night but, from the UK, they are very close to the southern horizon, so could be missed unless you have a clear horizon . The sea would be ideal, assuming cooperative weather conditions.

Dave
 
With 31 min exposure time you probably could do better, however.............
What was your iso? I have an image taken with the Sigma 150-600mm at 800 iso with just 7 min exposure, a mix of 25 s and one 40s, which shows more detail. But it was taken in the middle of winter when the sky was both darker and cleaner. The sky is pretty mucky and moist right now. It was also integrated in PixInsight, which knocks the socks off DSS, but then it should do because DSS is free and PI most definitely isn't! Actually I need to do it again as I was at the very bottom of the extremely steep learning curve that is PI, and it shows. Now I'm about on the 1st rung! For an early effort I'd say not too shabby at all. You can see in the reprocessed one you're getting a bit of unwanted skyglow showing which will only get worse if you try to push it. It's very easy to go too far with astro. If you haven't already done so you may be able to use a gradient tool in PS to clean up the background. Sorry, I don't use PS either. I'm a PaintShop Pro user (well, someone has to be........... ;))
If galaxies were of uniform brightness it would all be so much easier. It's all too easy to burn out the core trying to get the fainter detail, but you haven't done that.
The rabbit hole is as deep as you want to make it and some people get a very long way down and still don't find the bottom. My rabbit is a Mediterranean surface dweller............

My ISO was 1600, I should have put that in the image details... Opps! :facepalm:

I've just looked at Pixinsight and it gets a lot of good mentions, although at 230 euros I'll have to wait to see if I'm still interested in AP in a year haha. I quite like using DSS at the moment; I was using SiriL on a mac which I found really hard to use and took hours and hours. I dug out an old laptop to put DSS on and it's miles better than SiriL.

Yes I was wary about going too far and getting that ugly glow in the sky. I think I pushed it about as far as I could, so I think I need to practice my technique and just take longer images. I'm planning on going camping in my van at the weekend. It's a new moon with clear skies forecast, so I'm hoping to find somewhere dark and get a good couple of hours of integration time.
 
Good one Carl, and you have also picked up M110 too. From what I read astrophotography makes what we spend on 'ordinary' photography look like chicken feed.

DAve

Thanks Dave! I don't think it's that bad really, but like anything you can spend as much or as little as you like. A star tracker can be bought for £300-350 and you can use it with your camera and a tele lens (that's what I've done). After that, I think it's an EQ mount with a telescope, which might set you back £1200-1500 or so I guess. Beyond that I think you're into guide scopes, dew heaters, actively cooled astro cameras, fancy filters and whatnot, which I think is when it gets spendy!
 
Recently I've become interested in taking images of deep-sky objects, and have spent quite a few hours trying to learn about it (plus countless hours on YouTube!). I began by taking a few stationary images on a tripod in the garden with my Fuji X-T2 and 100-400mm lens, and stacking them into one image. I quickly learned that stacking 100 single 0.5-second images doesn't give you much data to play with, and it takes an absolute age to process. At 400mm the only way to get longer exposures is to use an equatorial mount to counter the rotation of the earth. I don't want to invest in a full-sized EQ mount yet so I went halfway and bought myself a star tracker.

I ventured out last night to a quiet car park on a nearby hill, away from the light pollution of my town, and took some images. It was nice and dark and I was able to get 31 minutes of exposure in total. Processing the images is a steep learning curve, but I've managed to get something I'm really happy with. 2 weeks ago my first image was a muddy brown sky with just a white dot for the centre of the core. I feel like astrophotography is going to be a bit of a rabbit hole!

Fuji X-T2
Fuji 100-400 f/f.6
Giottos carbon fibre tripod
iOptron Skyguider Pro.

31 x 60 second light images = 31 mins total exposure
9 x 60 second darks
10 x bias
No flats

Stacked in DSS and processed in PS.

View attachment 292550
:eek: incredible, Thanks for sharing details how to take this marvellous things.
 
... until someone finds the receipts and tells you!!!

Fortunately (for my bank balance) and yet unfortunately (for my ambition), I don't have the patience for "proper" astrophotography at either the taking stage or to do the necessary PP once the original images are in the bag. I content myself with single shot images of either the Moon (with a 400mm and 1.4x telecon on a Fuji) or wide field, usually in South Crete (Aghia Gallini beach being a favourite spot - no lights to the South for about 200 miles).

Fortunately, we have some people here with far more patience who share their results for which I thank them - as does my wife and my bank manager!
 
Back
Top