[Author Prev][Author Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Author Index][Thread Index]
Re: [APML] M31 pentax67 e200 FSQ-106...
Jeff,
It beats my best also; nice image.
Steve,
I agree that E200 pushed +2 and curve stretching on single shot of
this object probably always going to be around this level of "grainyness",
but I bet 3 X 60 averaged or median combined, and a little noise reduction
on the result would be very presentable with E200. This object may lean
toward an M20 approach -- E200 exposures and then a Provia 400 for the
better blues, and then combine. On the other hand, the large dynamic range
of M31 does not lend it self well to the more limited range in slide film,
so instinct would lead me away from slides. On the other hand, I've done a
single Supra 400 on M31 and have never been happy with it no matter how I
appoached the post-scan processing.
I'm now working with a 12"SCT at F10 and 6.3, so unless I want to do a
"Gendleresque" mosiac, I doubt I'll revist that object for imaging for
quite a while.
Again, nice job capturing the range of flavors of this gal with a single
shot of slide.
Steve Holak
Senior Software Architect
Brokerage Concepts IS Dept.
610-491-4879
email: steve.holak@bcitpa.com
steve banbury
<banburys@sonic.ne To: Discussion of Film Astrophotography <astro-photo@seds.org>
t> cc:
Sent by: Subject: Re: [APML] M31 pentax67 e200 FSQ-106...
astro-photo-bounce
s@seds.org
08/17/2004 02:59
PM
Please respond to
Discussion of Film
Astrophotography
Looks nice Jeff---certainly beats my best attempts!!
I wonder if E200 is the optimum film to use on M31---it seems to do
better on things like M8 or the NAN.
Steve
Jeff Crilly wrote:
>Here's an M31 from July that I finally got around to
>scanning and processing. This is a 60 minute exposure
>on the G11.
>The film is E200 with Push+2 developing, and scanned
>with the epson 4870....
>
>http://fototime.com/DE4349220EB58B4/orig.jpg
>
>Be gentle.. m31 is kindof a tough object -- bright
>core, subtle
>dark lanes and detail in the outer disk. I've seen
>better, mainly
>with CCD...
>
>Fwiw, with the FSQ at f5 the object doesnt take up
>much
>of the 6x7 FOV.. I've cropped this down to about a
>35mm size,
>maybe even smaller.
>
>jeff
>
>_______________________________________________
>Astro-Photo mailing list
>Astro-Photo@seds.org
>http://seds.org/mailman/listinfo/astro-photo
>
>
>
>
_______________________________________________
Astro-Photo mailing list
Astro-Photo@seds.org
http://seds.org/mailman/listinfo/astro-photo
_______________________________________________
Astro-Photo mailing list
Astro-Photo@seds.org
http://seds.org/mailman/listinfo/astro-photo