From: Mark Gaffney <markgaffney@me.com>
Date: December 4, 2009 8:26:31 PM MST
To: Astro_IIDC@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [Astro_IIDC] Alan`s version...
Thanks Ray,
I`ve heard about the smallest shadow method of locating the sun & will be very careful not to use the finder. I haven`t been known for my keenness to use it anyway as it`s often in difficult positions! I`ve got mine set up permanently now fairly accurately positioned with duct tape around the tube where the bracket is at the back but will cap it anyway when viewing the Sun. I`ve been trolling the net especially articles involving the Baader film & have found some examples (besides Alan`s ones) of images taken with it. One guy was saying he had the Sun in view within minutes of the delivery truck leaving. It may take me a bit longer- the spring form is a Christmas present for example! I have both a Meade f3.3 & a Mogg f0.3 reducer so I`ll try those to get more of the Sun in the picture. Ha filters are probably a ways down the track for me! Thanks for responding..
Mark.
On 05/12/2009, at 12:08 PM, Ray Byrne wrote:
Hi Mark,
First off I must stress that "OBSERVING AND IMAGING THE SUN IS DANGEROUS" !!! There is no room for any mistakes at all as the likely consequence is blindness and a horrible kind of blindness that will leave a hole in you vision that you can't see around and is permanent.
Currently I use a refractor (4") for observing/imaging the Sun and a Herschel wedge with supplied filtering within it. I've found this gives higher resolution than say the Thousand Oaks type front fitting Energy Rejection Filters (ERF) but they are quite pricey (around £250.00). Having said that the Baader Film does produce better results than the Thousand Oaks ERFs if images I've seen are anything to go by.
Imaging in daytime is very difficult as the seeing is nearly always poor but as you've pointed out some parts of the day are better than others. I'd go for the early morning as the sun hasn't had time to heat-up your surroundings and although you'll be looking through a thicker part of the atmosphere the air will be steadier.
Make sure what ever you cobble together lets no unfiltered light through at all if you're not absolutely sure don't do it. Make sure your finder is capped or just take it off altogether. Use the smallest shadow technique to acquire the Sun in your scope, it's a test on your patience but it's the safest way. I feel that you will get better results with less aperture than the C9.25 as a smaller scope will perform better in poor seeing (I won't go into to the whys and wherefores it's to do with the wave-like property of light). So if you do use the C9.25 it will be best to use an off-axis mask with your film in it.
Hydrogen Alpha scopes/filters are really a buzz (although I still love white light sunspot observing/imaging) but the kit is quite expensive. The Coronado PST is a good deal I use a Coronado SolarMax40 scope which is a higher resolution more sophisticated version of the PST.
When's all said and done though, at the moment the Sun is very quiet and has been for a few years so mull it over take your time and read up on it.
Cloudynights.com has a good forum for Solar Observing visit there and see what they are up to. They are a helpful, sensible and a friendly bunch.
IHTH
AND I MUST REITERATE BE VERY CAREFUL
Ray
On 4 Dec 2009, at 20:44, Mark Gaffney wrote:
Hi again Ray,
I`ve been looking at your solar images with interest as I hope next week to buy some Baader Solar film (about a foot square of it ) & try my own images during the lazy daytime period. I understand best results are to be had in the early morning & late afternoon? I`ve spoken to Alan about this & he tells me his hydrogen Alpha filter would cost $1400 or so but that basic solar imaging can be done for the $45 I`m paying for the Baader film. I hope to buy a cake making "spring form" & tuck the solar film between two pieces of card board attached to this & mount it on the scope. Alan solar images mostly with a 4" "Little Big Man" scope & although I have a NexStar 4SE I was going to try my C9.25 perhaps, reduced...Any comments? Are there any sites you use for instance which keep you abreast with solar activity?
Mark.
On 04/12/2009, at 1:35 PM, Ray Byrne wrote:
Hi Mark,
I've taken much better shots of the moon using a digital camera than your effort with your Scorpion camera. My old Nikon Coolpix 4500 has been afocally attached using a coupling device and its self timer function to eliminate camera/telescope shake from the exposure. Webcams (i.e. your Scorpion or your Imaging Source camera) are used by most amateur imagers to attempt hi-resolution imaging of the moon, planets, and the solar disc in it's various depths not for pictorial shots like the mosaic you have attempted. Many many years ago before digicams I used a b/w digital surveillance camera to do a mosaic of the moon but I made a better fist of it than your Scorpion image. Somehow you are over complicating things. I had none of the software you have now it was a one shot type of affair (no movies to stack) and I think PS had just got the layers function.
Here's a link:
<http://www.in4media.co.uk/rayandtelescope/rayandtelescopel.html>
If you just want lunar portraits go the digicam route and as I've said several times before just keep it simple for goodness sake!
ATVB
Ray
On 3 Dec 2009, at 23:36, Mark Gaffney wrote:
Hi Alan & Milton,
Alan`s kindly effort in processing one of my new Scorpion shots (in
need of first aid) is now posted to this folder; http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/Astro_IIDC/files/Lunar/Mark%60s%20Moon%20shots/
It`s under the title "Picture 1.png ...Alan`s tweaked version of one
of my shots".
It is a slightly derivative version having been snapshotted with
Command-Shift-4...
Mark.