Yes it's another M42,But

[ben therrell]

RON,

    Thanks.  I'm getting more interested in imaging all the time, especially since I've run across some people who
can talk me through it.

    I'm going to need a new mount for DSOs and that's going to be a major expense.  Iv'e thought about starting with a webcam since I have a spare computer that I can arrange for easy setup.

    Got to think it all through...

Clear, dry skies
Ben

[ben therrell]

HELLO,

     I picked this up off a a newsgroup while ago:  http://hubblesite.org/newscenter/archive/releases/2006/54

     NGC 6357 is yet another variation on the cluster forming theme.  Both have extremely massive stars, in
6357 it's Pismis 24 - 1, and in M 42 it's the Becklin - Neugebauer object located near the Trapezium in that rich
cluster that's forming.

    Both M42 and 6357 exhibit those coulmns of dust similar to the ones in M16.

Dec 11, PM
Clear, dry skies,
Ben

[Ron]

RON,

    Thanks.  I'm getting more interested in imaging all the time, especially since I've run across some people who
can talk me through it.

    I'm going to need a new mount for DSOs and that's going to be a major expense.  Iv'e thought about starting with a webcam since I have a spare computer that I can arrange for easy setup.

    Got to think it all through...

Clear, dry skies
Ben

Ben,

As my eyes are getting older and deteriorating, with macula degeneration and floaters, I can always see more detail of the night sky in my images than I can at the eyepiece.  Even though the images aren't great they do offer a lot of interesting detail on Planets, Moon, Comets, Asteroids and some of the brighter DSOs.

Since I don't use any computer for my imaging I have to settle for second rate images but they still offer more detail than I get at the ep with the above mentioned eye problems, and of course the growing light pollution problem for city viewing.

It's really not that expensive to get images of the night sky for just the enhanced view and to study them.  I started out with just snapping  images of the sky just  because my digital cameras could see more of the sky than my eyes could.  I used these early images just to study and find the constellations when I first became interested in Astronomy.

Web cams are great for Planet's and the Moon.  I have seen some great images taken with some fairly cheap web cams.

Jump in, it's fun 

Ron

[djrLX90]

Ron,

I am currently using a Stock Canon 300D thouugh a LX90 8" and use MaxDSLR for rotating, stacking, debayerizarion, gamma stretch and conversion to Linear TIFF format for processing in PSCS2.  It took a new tutorial written by Michael Covington to allow it to do for me what it is supposed to do.  Since I have been following this procedure, I have been able to reprocess old data that I thought was garbage.  Please give it a try and let me know how it works for you.  I was blown away.

Here is a link to the Tutorial

http://www.covingtoninnovations.com/dslr/MaxDSLR/index.html

David Rosenthal
Midland Park, NJ

[Ron]

David,

Thanks for the link.

I will give MaxDSLR another try with the link you posted.  I was happy with the way it rotated and stacked some of my old images, but that is all I used it for.  I will see if they will give me another trial download.

I had been thinking about Images Plus since it is much cheaper but I wasn't happy with the trial version.  I would really like to use Iris, since it is free, but I haven't had any luck with it even with trying to get help from the Yahoo Group.

Ron

[djrLX90]

David,

Thanks for the link.

I will give MaxDSLR another try with the link you posted.  I was happy with the way it rotated and stacked some of my old images, but that is all I used it for.  I will see if they will give me another trial download.

I had been thinking about Images Plus since it is much cheaper but I wasn't happy with the trial version.  I would really like to use Iris, since it is free, but I haven't had any luck with it even with trying to get help from the Yahoo Group.

Ron

Ron,

Glad to help out.  I have played aroubnd with the Trial Version of Images Plus as well and I seem to like MaxDSLR better.  Perhaps I'll shift to IP if I ever change from a DSLR to a dedicated AP CCD camera.  MaxDSLR seems to be better suited for pricessing RAW frames from my 300D than IP is.  I have played around with Iris a bit, but it is to difficult to master and I spend enough time processing as it is

I have just put up a new Image Galllery to show my modest attempts at AP over the last few months.  I have just switched from using the LX90 in Alt/Az to a wedge and should get some better images after I master the dreaded "Drift Alignmen".  Have a look and let me know what you think...

http://www.pbase.com/david_r_astrophotography/galleries

David Rosenthal
LX90 8" w/PE Ez-Focus and modified wedge
ETX90-EC [Supercharged by Dr. Clay]
Celestron 80mm Firstscope
Meade f/6.3 FR/FF
Canon 300D

[Ron]

David,

Looks like you're headed in the right direction now going with the wedge.  Your images are better than my tries of the same objects.  I couldn't get anything at all for the Eagle, M16.   Your M27 is very good, much better than my results for the same object.

Did you do the modification for the wedge?  I have the standard wedge and only used it a couple of times.  I don't think it is a very good support for my 8"LX200gps.  My scope is a few pounds heavier than the LX90, but I see you have another scope piggybacked on your setup.  How stable  is your setup?

Mine was so wobbly, and hard to adjust, I got totally frustrated and haven't used it since my first couple of times.

This looks like a good site for Polar Alignment if you haven't seen it already http://www.andysshotglass.com/DriftAlignment.html

I might get enough nerve to try my wedge again, but it deffinitely needs some more modification, especially with the azimuth adjustment.

Ron

[djrLX90]

Ron,

Thanks....I spent quite a bit of time working in Alt/Az before moving to the wedge.
I did do the mods myself.  The Az Adjustment was a major upgrade.  It is so smooth and stable now and has a much greater adjustment range.  I also made the wedge more permantly mounted to the tripod.  If you'd like I can take some more shots of what I have done to make the set-up more stable?

I have also added a Losmandy 4.5lb 2-D counterweight setup which is not shown there.  The added weight of the piccybacked 80 was to much for the motors.   One night out and I picked up the weights.  That made a huge difference in balance and tracking.

I got my modification Ideas from this site.  It is an LX90 site, but the mods for the wedge should apply...

http://m1.aol.com/kewtasheck/azimuth.html

David

[Ron]

David,

I'm pretty sure that is the same wedge I have, the Meade standard wedge.  The only modifications I made were; trying to find larger knobs for the AZ adjustment, putting a teflon bearing surface between the wedge and the tripod.  Since I wasn't able to tighten the wedge down real hard to the tripod head, the whole assembly was very shaky.

Yes, I would like to see more pictures of your set up and modifications.  I'm pretty sure I have the same counter balance even though it's not the Losmandy.

Thanks,

Ron

[djrLX90]

Ron,

Here is the procedure I followed to more securely mount the wedge to the tripod head.  I did this in conjuction with the Az modification.  I followed the procedure and it is easy if you are handy and have the correct tools.

http://www.atm-workshop.com/tripod-mods.html

I will try and get some close-ups of the areas I worked on.

I added a CD between the Tripod Head and the Wedge as well as placing thin nylon wahers between the Alt knobs and the wedge.

David

[Ron]

David,

I had tried some of these tripod mods but wanted to leave my tripod in a state to still be able to go Alt/Az for quick and easy setup.

I'm anxious to try again with  the wedge but need some skies been rather cloudy down here for awhile.\

Do you have a right angle finder?  Using the standard finder that came with my scope is rather difficult

Ron

[djrLX90]

I hear ya'.  This procedure allows you to go back with a minimal amount of effort.  I believe it is not possible to get good results with the standard tripod+wedge with out doing it.  Some day I may get a used GEM and move the OTA over to that.  But that is $$$$ and I have enough in it already and have no where nearly maxed out its capabilities.

I do not have a right angle finder.  That is on my list.  I do have a reflex-site on it.  It helps quite a bit.

Using the standard finder is quite difficult, especially when polar aligning

David