Lagoon Nebula

The more frames of data the better I think Keith. You will get much better background noise with more frames. One other question worth considering, what compression level do you use for final output? I always use 10 (minimum compression) as what compression does is add colour artifacts to the image.

I did some tests into dark noise vs expsore length and there seems to be a sweet spot at about 6 mins at 400 ASA.

I know Dave G shoots at 800, but I think that the better colour saturation and 400 outways the speed advantage.

Later,

Jed.

It also needs saying that as far as wide field deep sky astrophotography goes, your up there with the very best IMHO.

Still got the bug I'm on a steep learning curve at the moment considering i'm still all manual with guiding, tracking, alignment etc. I can't wiat for the moon to move away at the end of the month, I plan on having a real go then

The more frames of data the better I think Keith. You will get much better background noise with more frames. One other question worth considering, what compression level do you use for final output? I always use 10 (minimum compression) as what compression does is add colour artifacts to the image.

I always use 1 ! I thought that that was better, since the more compression, the more data saved, I absolutely did'nt know about that :oops: I'll try that too next time.

6 mins at ISO 400, I'll remember that. Thanks for the tips lads,
Keith..

Keith,

Nice image, no, very nice image.