Archive for the “Articles” Category

The good news continues!  Noel & I have just got the Astropic of the Week on the International Year of Astronomy website.  It is the iconic Belt region of Orion.  Thank you Steve for putting our image onto a well-viewed site :)

Comments No Comments »

Greatly missed, Sir Arthur C Clarke, who wrote a Foreword for Star Vistas, would have been 91 today.  We miss you and will continue to look for you “out there” :(

Comments No Comments »

It looks like there is going to be quite a rush on the First Edition of Star Vistas - not only due to the stunning images, but also the distinguished Foreword Authors - Sir Arthur C Clarke - Sir Patrick Moore - and Dr. Brian May :)  To avoid disappointment it might be an idea to pre-order your copy now.  You can pre-order Star Vistas through Barnes & Noble and associated stores as well as the U.K. Amazon and the U.S.A. Amazon sites.

Comments 1 Comment »

All the recent publicity in the popular Press has sent a torrent of comments in my direction.  Quite a few members of Joe Public made dismissive comments about the images saying they were simply “Photoshopped”.  I guess I should not expect the general public to understand the process that goes into creating these images, so I think it is timely to say a few words on the subject here.

By “Photoshopped” these members of the public mean that the images were somehow created, painted almost with unreal heightened colours perhaps.  Nothing could be further from the truth!  Everything you see in the deep-sky images was present in the raw data (straight from the camera) - absolutely NOTHING has been added.  Photoshop is simply a tool - albeit an extremely powerful image processing tool.  The functions that are mostly employed are nonlinear stretches to pull out the faint data - whilst at the same time keeping the stars under control (it’s very easy to get the stars bloating if you’re not careful).  So all that Photoshop is doing is enhancing the image by bringing out faint objects already present in the data.  In fact it is a huge part of the processor’s time and effort to make sure that what is seen in the final image is “real” and not some artifact produced by careless or improper processing.  That’s why - if you compare the Star Vistas images with those from professional observatories (or other dedicated amateurs) you will find the images all very similar.

With regards to the colour you see in these images - to keep it short - the colours are “real”.  Real in the sense that the red in the emission nebulae really is that colour red, and any coloured stars are really that colour.  Once again, a great deal of time and effort is put in by the image processor (Noel in the case of all Star Vistas images) to make sure the colours are “real” and consistent.  The fact that you don’t actually “see” those colours when looking at these objects through small telescopes is due to the physiology of the eye.  Basically the eye is not good at discerning colour when the light intensities are low - that’s why things look like various levels of grey when you go out at night.  We know what the colours really are because spectroscopy tells us at what wavelengths hydrogen (for example) emits - and it tells us to a very high degree of accuracy.

So in summary - in all these deep-sky images - Photoshop is simply a tool to enhance the data which already exists - NOTHING is added.  Secondly, the colours you see in all these images are real.  If the physiology of the eye was different so that you could discern colour with low light intensities - these are the colours you would actually see.

A quick edit!  Noel correctly pointed out that sometimes something is added :)  Star spikes are occasionally added (even though they occur naturally in the Hyperstar III images) for added effect.

Comments No Comments »

Noel & I have an image today on the International Year of Astronomy’s website as “Astropic of the Week”.  It is our image of NGC6914 - a reflection nebula in the huge Gamma Cygni nebulosity IC1318.  Excellent!!!

NGC6914 in Cygnus

Comments No Comments »

For us deep-sky images I’m afraid the Moon is simply a nuisance, especially as it approaches full.  Well tonight I wanted to do some imaging - so there’s only one choice really, and that’s the Moon.  This image was taken with the Canon 40D and the 100-400 mm zoom lens with a x1.4 teleconverter giving me an overall 560 mm focal length. (more…)

Comments 2 Comments »

Now that the Hyperstar III is going to be the main imager for some time to come, I have just made some system hardware changes.  The (relatively) heavy Sky 90 has been removed as the guide scope and replaced with the old Celestron 80mm wide field refractor.  This refractor is extremely light and I needed to remove several counterweights from the C11 to achieve balance.  When I originally used this scope for guiding on the Hyperstar I, I routinely had an error graph showing less than 0.1 pixel excursions for the whole imaging session.  Using the Sky 90 as a guidescope I have never had such good guiding and typically errors would be around the 0.5 (or greater) pixel level during 3-4 hours of imaging.  We’ll have to see if this change produces sharper images from the Hyperstar III - I have the feeling we will see a marked improvement.

Comments No Comments »

Here is an aerial view of the NFO.  The house on the end where the road bends round is home to the NFO, and you can see the dome as a white circle at the bottom of the garden.

observatory_crop.jpg

Comments No Comments »

I now realise that the initial case I considered - a page of text facing a mirror with the page parallel to the mirror - was a very special, and very restrictive case - so it wasn’t really the best way to discuss “how a mirror works”. (more…)

Comments No Comments »

A while back I wrote how you get lateral inversion (”mirror writing”) in a mirror.  I worked out the solution independently of the (same) one given by Martin Gardner in his book “The Ambidextrous Universe”. (more…)

Comments No Comments »