M31

Not realistic for one hour) No quad-band? It would be more suitable.

Aug 26th, 2025

SPalychReply to oeswww

I set up 60 two-minute exposures at dawn, but only managed to get through 30 before the sky started to cloud over. Buying the camera was quite a spontaneous decision—I don’t even have a two-inch duo filter yet.

Aug 26th, 2025

Oleg NovoselovReply to SPalych

It's fine for tri-band, but quad-band isn't really for this. I honestly don't understand what it's for, but it's definitely not for a refractor.

Aug 26th, 2025

SPalychReply to Oleg Novoselov

I wanted to try this filter for nebulae as well, but I didn't have time.

Aug 26th, 2025

oeswwwReply to Oleg Novoselov

Quadband is like a universal soldier. It's similar to the L-PRO from Optolong, but for stronger light pollution. Triband and duoband are suitable for nebulae. I just wonder where all that signal, and hydrogen in particular, comes from.

Aug 27th, 2025

SPalychReply to oeswww

I used the tutorial by lukomatico "Learn to Process in PixInsight! - Free Data - OSC M31 Andromeda Galaxy" during processing.

Aug 27th, 2025

oeswwwReply to SPalych

I'll take a look.

Aug 27th, 2025

dmcl

Time? I don't believe it.

Aug 27th, 2025

SPalychReply to dmcl

https://drive.google.com/file/d/17_qey74lJCv64GqXFiOTT0uG-CVH7K_A/view?usp=sharing
Here is a screenshot of the folder with the light frames. Why would I make anything up?

Aug 27th, 2025

dmclReply to SPalych

I just finished shooting M31 (https://www.deepskyhosting.com/WT1lWIB). Same camera (ZWO ASI2600 DUO). A telescope with similar speed (Askar 103APO 0.8x - f/5.6). I was shooting in a blue zone for light pollution. And somehow forgot to remove the filter (ANTLIA Quad Band). This filter has similar specs to yours, but it also has a window in the infrared part. Meaning, it passes no less light. I didn't notice right away that the shots were dark. I shot for an hour. Out of curiosity, I stacked them at home. It wasn't even close to what's in the discussed photo. Therefore, I'm expressing my skepticism. No offense.

Aug 27th, 2025

dmclReply to SPalych

If only AI had tried...

Aug 27th, 2025

SPalychReply to dmcl

I mentioned above what guided me in processing the material. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B8UXjefiuQM&t=1331s

Aug 27th, 2025

SPalychReply to dmcl

Here is the stack of those 30 frames, processed in ASIStudio. https://drive.google.com/file/d/1Kmr86J-3-BicXugxjFB7LRopdSbmzbmw/view?usp=sharing

Aug 27th, 2025

SPalychReply to dmcl

I use a PixInsight, AI is present in BXT and NXT, but as for using neural networks to generate images—no way. I can't prove in any way that I did everything myself—from capturing 30 subs (first I shot 29 out of 60 frames with a gain of 50 and temperature -10, then the camera disconnected due to an old USB3 cable; I plugged it into another port on the ASIAir; when the connection was restored, I deleted what was captured, set the usual gain 100 and temperature 0, and redid 30 out of 60, then clouds rolled in) to processing.

Aug 27th, 2025

dmclReply to SPalych

Probably, I'm mistaken. I didn't mean to offend you. Sorry if I did.

Aug 28th, 2025

SPalychReply to dmcl

All good. I wish I could collect light for many hours...

Aug 28th, 2025

oeswwwReply to dmcl

As they say, it's inexplicable but true. The triband filter could isolate the hydrogen and reduce the brightness, which might have revealed details + the 2600 camera also helps, but it still seems a bit hard to believe. I shot with a 61mm Sharpstar at 360mm and even stacked 5 hours, and I still didn't get such a result (you can check my first work). By the way, I also took a test shot with a quad-band filter, and there's clearly no such level of detail and hydrogen there either. Speaking of which, I checked your stacked data and got a strange gradient. It's stepped.

Aug 28th, 2025

SPalychReply to oeswww

Well, even though my colleagues' skepticism stings, I'm not going to try to prove anything to anyone else. I did what I could with an hour of exposure time.

Aug 29th, 2025

dmclReply to SPalych

Don't be offended. I've seen your original image. I can say you processed it very successfully.

Aug 29th, 2025

oeswwwReply to SPalych

We've already moved past the stage of disbelief.

Aug 29th, 2025

SPalychReply to oeswww

So, what exactly are you accusing me of? That this isn't one hour of exposure, but fifty? Why would I fake that, please explain.

Aug 29th, 2025

oeswwwReply to SPalych

So we're saying we've already moved past the stage of distrust/suspicion.