Posts Made By: James Braddy

August 7, 2015 04:17 PM Forum: ASTRONOMY

Where have all the astronomers gone?

Posted By James Braddy

Perhapse it's just me, I 've been out of the hobby since 07 but seems like there's not near as much traffic here, on Cloudy Nights, or in the Yahoo groups as there was back then. Is the hobby dying, or has everyone just moved on to other venues like facebook and twitter? Granted, I'm not tech savvy, I still use a flip phone, don't have facebook or twitter accounts, and have never sent a text message in my life. How do I re-connect with other amateur astronomers?

October 9, 2004 04:01 PM Forum: Equipment Talk

Thinking Caps, please

Posted By James Braddy

Are you saying you can't see it at all, or that you just arn't seeing the level of detail you wish to see. Given sufficiently dark skies, M-42 is a naked eye object, easy in binoculars. In terms of seeing "Streamers" in the nebulosity, M42 is a diffuse nebula, the classic example of a DSO. I doubt you are going to see much detail with small refractors, or 90mm Mak's. Deep space observers don't say "Aperture Rules" for nothing. The real secret to seeing detail in DSO's is aperture, and a showpiece object like M42 really exemplifies this. In my 80mm achromat, I see M42 as a nebulous haze, with my 8"dob I see streamers, with my 14.5" I see ripples and knodules that look solid enough to walk on, extending from one edge of the eyepiece to the other. This isn't a function of optical precision, it's a function of aperture! Don't waste your time looking for mag14 galaxies, the hoarshead, or nebulous detail in the Rosette or veil with your 50mm Borg, it just ain't going to happen! Another thing, forget the O-III filter with your current scope lineup, it does you more harm than good in smaller than 4" scopes. An O-III filter rejects greater than 90% of incomming light, and you don't have very much light comming into a 2"-3" refractor to begin with. IMHO, If you want to observe detail in nebula's, your 4" Stellarvue is your best bet for now, and you should consider adding an 8" or larger reflector to your scope collection.

Of course there is one other posibility I just now thought of, and that is poor transparancy. Humidity, haze, or even a thin invisible layer of high sirrus clouds will act like a neutral density filter, reducing the detail seen in any scope, especially ones with limited aperture, while bright high contrast object like a star might be a little softer, they will otherwise seem unaffected essentially decieving you into thinking your seeing is clear.

June 14, 2005 02:15 PM Forum: CCD Imaging and Processing/Deep Sky

June 14, 2005 02:20 PM Forum: CCD Imaging and Processing/Deep Sky

My first DSO image - Eagle

Posted By James Braddy

Awesome Image Michael!!!

June 16, 2005 04:27 PM Forum: CCD Imaging and Processing/Deep Sky

Ok, I'll ask a question....or three!

Posted By James Braddy

Another image from last night. M-8

September 8, 2005 09:52 AM Forum: CCD Imaging and Processing/Deep Sky

M 31 Core

Posted By James Braddy

WOW!, I'm having the same problem with field of view. I'm using a 4" F/8.7 APO, and an ST8 non-e NABG on a GM8. I'm new to astrophotography, and have made two runs at M31. One was a single long guided exposure, but I burned out the core. I tried stacking about 90 short 10sec exposures, and got virtually no arm detail. I need to find a happy medium, and try again.

dan kowall said:

I'm always impressed by the majesty of this galaxy.
It's too wide for my widefield instrument, but I couldn't resist going after part of it. I would like to do a mosaic of this sometime.
I was just barely able to include part of NGC 206, the beautiful blue cluster, at the bottom of the image, and you can just start to see the haze that connects M 110 and M 31.
Imaged on multiple nights.

ST2000XM on a Tak FSQ at f/5
LRGB: 75-85-65-50 minutes

As you can see, I lost some exposures but compensated in processing.
Thanks for looking,

dan kowall
photonhunter.com

February 22, 2006 01:07 PM Forum: CCD Imaging and Processing/Deep Sky

Newbie needs help

Posted By James Braddy

Hi John,

Ok, I'm a newby too, I've been imaging less than a year now, and had similar aprehentions a year ago. I started using a SV102 that was originally bought exclusively for visual use, mounted on a GM8, had to buy a new laptop because I din't have one, and wound up paying too much for a used parallel ST8 on astromart.

Here's what I've learned so farr:

1) Great equipment makes a big difference, but you have to learn how to use it too. The only way to do that is to go image something, and you can't image anything untill you have a complete system, that is compatible and works together. Every system, no matter how expensive, will have to be tuned and de-bugged. Expect to have problems and frustrations, plan to minimize them if you can, but be prepared to invest more time and money to remedy them when they occur. The initial investment to get started in imaging is intimidating for us mere mortals with modest incomes, use the time while you're saving, to read all you can before hand, and deliberately plan how to spend your money to build the best system you can afford! Because unless you're rich, you won't be able to afford to buy and sell CCD cameras and high end equatorial mounts like some people do eyepieces.

2) The most important component of any imaging system is the mount. Nothing else matters if the mount sucks. I spent an additional $400 on accessories, just to get my GM8 to work for autoguiding, and it did work fairly well. It was the weakest most limiting component of my system though, so... My first major equipment change, was to sell my GM8 and buy an EM200 Temma. Invest the majority of your money in the best mount you can afford, and anything else you scrimp on, will be MUCH easier to make due with. I can now comfortably wait, as I consider whether to try to upgrade my camera, or my scope next.

3) Wait and plan rather than rush out and buy what you can afford now. I've got a lot of buddies who have been trying to learn imaging as long or longer than I have, some have spent as much or more time and money than I have, and are yet to take their first recognisable images. Hold out till you can afford that SBIG, it's worth it! I'm not saying there arn't guys who can do better with other equipment, but.... I have a great friend who's been trying to get started in imaging with a HX916 on a 10" LX200 for two years now, and sadly I don't think he's shown me one recongisable image yet.

4) Budget money for software, not just hardware! In most cases it's just as expensive, is even more important to the quality of your images, and has a much steeper learning curve!

5) Concentrate on the fundamentals first. Why would I wory about stuff like dithering or advanced color processing, if I can't even take a decent flat frame?

6) It's great when you can hang out with folks who know what they're doing. The handfull of experienced imagers in my area, have been cool, and often invite me to go out with them, but.... are usually buisy doing their own thing, or their schedules arn't compatable with mine, so I don't get to benefit from their imput as much as I'd like. I bought Wodowski's book, and and it's a great refrence, be prepaired to use it like one. You will read and re-read certain parts till you figure out particular tasks, which can be a challenge, because you won't have all the equipment or software he's refering to!

JDBraddy

May 30, 2006 10:12 AM Forum: CCD Imaging and Processing/Deep Sky

M109

Posted By James Braddy

Yea, I need a million dollars, all new equipment, a private observatory in west Texas, and some free time to enjoy it, but hey, we do what we can, with what we're given! Judging by this image, you're doing a lot better than me!
Keep up the good work.
JDBraddy

Jim Thommes said:

Here is an image of M109. I was a bit challenged with this one in that it is somewhat small and dim. I need a better scope than my C8; I need better guiding and mount stability than my ASGT; And I need more exposure. Oh well, maybe someday.....

I have attached a midsized image, a full size image and exposure / processing details are here:

http://jthommes.com/Astro/M109.htm


June 3, 2006 10:30 AM Forum: Reflectors

Paracorr blues

Posted By James Braddy

I don't know, I find the paracorr virtually useless with my 14.5" f/4.5 optics. Coma doesn't seem to be much of a problem anyway. I don't think my paracorr has even left the eyepiece case in a year or two. JDBraddy

GERRY LEVAC said:

I dont know about you guys but my visuable Paracorr is driving me nuts.Let me explain.When I collimate my Dob I can get everything to line up after laser ,sight tube ,chesire and autocollimator.Then I perform a lasered barlow procedure with Paracorr and its at least off 5mm at the diagonal faceplate.This is indicating the Paracorr is throwing it off.When I look at the construction of the Paracorr all I see is the introduction of 2 more piece of equipment in the light path to introduce misalignment ,the tube plus the loose tunable body wich is not a very tight fit can be turned and locked in many different spots.I guess the flip side is to not used one and put up with coma.Any one else having the same problems ?


thanks

gerry

August 22, 2007 01:56 AM Forum: CCD Imaging and Processing/Deep Sky

Filter Questions

Posted By James Braddy

Wow! I'm amazed! Does none of the imagers out there have any experience to share, or opinions on this?