[ravnostic]

Man, I’ve forgotten we can post early and I’ll be dam’d if I’ve even started looking to see what I’ll post!

[ravnostic]

Crap, orionid ! I hope I saved a few mo frames of that one!!

[ravnostic]

So this isn’t about sepia or that blue-tint alternative or some such? I gotta find something like this again? http://fossilspringsaz.com/pics/2011/mar/30/glass06sml.jpg

[ravnostic]

T-mounts? Got several, including one for Nikon; it’s the mounting rig for telescopes (and some of my best friends are Nikoners, NTTAWWT…)

[ravnostic]

Actually, it’s just not that good. One shot is blurry (not sure why) and there are color seams from the different levels of light pollution where the stitching didn’t do so well with the color. But…I have another view, without the light pollution. You may be seeing that one here in a couple weeks (or not; haven’t done my final pickin’s yet.) But thanks regardless! It definitely shows some serious detail with the galactic core goodness!

[ravnostic]

Add to that: You can buy polar mounts designed for DSLRs that will work with whatever lens you have for (practically) dirt cheap. And Astrophotography, unless you’re up on a mtn at 10-12K feet (which if I’m not mistaken is a bit higher than any mtn you’re nearby to) have a serious limitation that you cannot get around: Seeing conditions. Seeing, in astrophotography, has to do with atmospheric turbulence; it’s going to limit you to stars that are at least .5 arc-seconds in diameter. In a big scope; that’s a serious limitation for though you can magnify, you cannot get star images sharper than that (short of shooting with special CCD cameras that cost in the $10K range using lasers to compensate in a single frame for the atmospheric turbulence.) Thus, sure, I can fill 1/2 a cropped sensor frame with the Whirlpool Galaxy and see some pretty neat detail–but it’s not going to appear sharper at full res; in fact, it can’t help but appear blurry. I will never get Hubble-tight images.

I’m seriously, at this point, considering selling my rig and getting something with a wider FOV for just that reason.

[ravnostic]

I can tell you that lugging around a large scope for astro is troublesome, and you won’t use is (most likely) often enough to make it worth your while to spend a mint on it (esp. when you can get new, current, lighter weight stuff for just a couple grand.) On the other hand, I can teach you how to polar align that beast in less than an hour, if you have the moon or (with a front-mounted solar filter) sun to view before hand), even less time than that (esp. if the planets are out and about), and do it good enough for 2 minute exposures, assuming there isn’t wind or gnats farting nearby.

I dream of full frame. RTO time is coming to an end soon, and if OT kicks back in (a fair to good change it will before summer’s end) I have my eye on the Canon 6D. I can’t imagine what I could do with near-noiseless ISO 6400 frames. :o)

[ravnostic]

Due to imperfections brought on by nasty light pollution, I won’t be using this in the astrofarktography contest, so sure, orionid:

https://plus.google.com/107857888121727893520/posts/bxePoV8WWu5?hl=en

A composite of 10-14 (I fergit) shots, one minute in duration each, detailing the center of the Milky Way. f/1.4. I’d do better with 2 minutes at f/2.8, I think, though.

[ravnostic]

#1 – Ask yourself these questions: Did you maintain a constant focus through the exposures? Or are you compositing two separate compositions? Will you feel dirty submitting it?

It’s a single frame, .4 seconds, focus on the cacti. The moon, at this magnification, moves pretty durned fast. Dunno if I think it’s about the silhouette, or about what’s creating the sil. I would’t feel dirty about it, considering it’s not even a stack or anything.

\I’ll continue to mull it over; anyone else have thoughts?

[ravnostic]

The push works for me; I’m not happy with my pics yet. ;o)

[ravnostic]

p.s. My current job has nothing to do with photography, but I got fired shortly after being made ‘permanent’, and fought against it with facts and data and positivity. I got hired back on; the first (I was told) that anyone had ever seen. Words matter; presentation matters.

//ironically, it’s screwed me out of promotions, as the HR gal that originally fired me is in every interview I have and has taken to make sure I don’t manage to grow within the company. Still working on that; but I still hold the job, at least. It’s a challenge I work upon every working day, and I’ll get there. At some point, I believe, her influence will no longer be enough.

[ravnostic]

Perhaps, if you put it in words well, you’ll be invited back, and on better terms. It’s possible. Accent on the positive, while pointing out the problems (with the paradigm, the situation, etc.). Emphasize what you liked about the position. Constructive criticism and all that. Doors open. Good luck!

[ravnostic]

+1

[ravnostic]

[+]1

[ravnostic]

Yep; anything goes, just needs to be square cropped.

[Author]

Posts