From: Mark Gaffney <markgaffney@mac.com>

Date: September 30, 2008 11:43:36 PM MDT

To: Astro_IIDC@yahoogroups.com

Subject: Re: [Astro_IIDC] UnFiltered Versus Light Pollution Filtered  Urban Imaging


Hi Milton, I did have a bit of a look at your results but light pollution isn`t really my problem. I managed to get the error reading on my PA down to 2 degrees 29 minutes using Iterative Polar Alignment (it started at 30 degrees then went to 2 on the 2nd cycle before going up, then down again) I think I had managed to find Sigma Octans but there was some discrepancy in it`s position as I was adjusting (due to the scope tracking I expect-would that be right?). All in time to pack up the scope for nearly a month to make a trip 600kms south to complete the final move from the old family home in the Blue Mountains! Good luck battling those street lights! Mark.

On 01/10/2008, at 3:29 PM, Milton Aupperle wrote:


Hi Willie;


Thanks.


The last 2 nights I've been trying to image M33 (up to 9 minute

exposures for luma), without much luck. I can just barely pick out

the some star clusters in the arms and a few bright "knots" ( reddish

nebula patches), but nothing good so far. It may be just to faint for

my urban sky conditions to do anything with.


My background skies at the dark site I was imaging at this summer

unfiltered ran 5,000 to 8,000 for 20 minute exposures, whereas here

in Calgary the background would be 65,535 after 13 minutes. Hopefully

the weather this winter will be better when I'm back there for

christmas.


Milton Aupperle


On 30-Sep-08, at 10:28 PM, Willie Strickland wrote:


Very interesting Milton.  I think the filtered images are quite

impressive for an 8" scope in an urban area.


Willie


Willie Strickland

cwskas@earthlink.net



------------------------------------


Yahoo! Groups Links