Are Broadband Light Pollution Filters Any Good?

Подписаться 17 тыс.

Просмотров 8 тыс.

50% 1

I almost didn't make this video, it was a last minute decision hence the pretty basic presentation, but lets take a look at some side-by-side comparisons of data taken with a light pollution filter, vs data taken without!
All data taken under bortle 7 skies.
/ lukomatico
/ lukomatico
player-one-astronomy.com/
AFFILIATE LINKS!!
Topaz Denoise, Gigapixel & Sharpen AI are some of my favorite software to aid in astro processing! If you buy the software through this link I would receive a commission at zero extra cost to yourself!
Topaz Labs Affiliate Link! - topazlabs.com/ref/1133/
My new Mini PC for imaging! Amazon Affiliate Links! - Anything you buy through one of these links will give me a small commission at no extra cost to yourself!
Amazon UK - amzn.to/3EOCgpV
Amazon US - amzn.to/3quGPlD
High Point Scientific Affiliate Links!
High Point Scientific Affiliate Link - www.highpointscientific.com/?...
Orion Telescopes & Binoculars Affiliate links!
www.pjatr.com/t/R0FHSUdKTEFGS...
www.pntrs.com/t/S0BMQ0pFQEVHR...
www.pntrs.com/t/R0JJSEVIS0ZCR...

Наука

Опубликовано:

6 окт 2022

Ссылка:

Скачать:

Готовим ссылку...

Добавить в:

Мой плейлист

Посмотреть позже

Комментарии : 105

@baz_astra Год назад

The old geriatrics on CloudyNights forum will be furious that you've just invalidated their stuck-record repetitions of "Light pollution filters destroy nebulosity" once and for all! Thanks for doing the hard work - it's appreciated :)

@lukomatico Год назад

Haha!! :-D I'm really happy you liked the video my friend - I guess light pollution and the filters themselves are a constantly evolving situation, generally accepted notions of only a short time ago can quickly be turned on their head it would seem! :-D I probably need to do more testing, but I was really impressed by this result I have to say! Thanks for watching & clear skies! :-)

@iamjessieray Год назад

Nice video! I love testing videos and would love to see more of them because it helps others make purchasing decisions and decisions on how to spend their imaging time. As far as the images, I am having a hard time choosing between the two, but I think overall the filtered shot looks better when zoomed out because of the colors. I think it would be interesting to see these two data sets be processed to the absolute max without regard to doing them the same. In other words, being processed as best as they can be and pulling out the most amount of detail for each image individually, that way you could see what they look like if you treated them the way you would with a serious imaging session.

@lukomatico Год назад

Thank you Jessie! - I agree that would have been an interesting extra avenue to explore, processed to the limit and see what that revealed! My gut instinct from the initial play with both sets of data is that the LP filtered image could be taken further before breaking down, and would likely be easier overall to process - there's no substitute for better skies of course but this comes pretty darn close at least haha! :-) Thanks for watching and leaving a great suggestion!

@AstroLaVista Год назад

I know you didn't intend for this to be a video but it turned out to be a great analyses Luke :) I had noticed before now that you image broad band targets infiltered, I wondered why with your B7 LP skies. Personally when zoomed out I preferred the brown hue and contrast of the plain UV/IR cut filter, then things got very interesting when you zoomed in because I almost had the opposite opinion! those Ha areas and certain details popped more with the IDAS! Very interested Luke and congrats on 8k subs. See ya at IAS2022! :D

@lukomatico Год назад

I can always rely on you for some really interesting feedback mate! :-D Thank you! Reading through the comments here I guess It's one of those things that's pretty subjective! - I think from a technical "ease of processing" standpoint the filtered data takes it, but I can absolutely see someone's appeal to the unfiltered data of course! :-) Can't wait to finally shake your hand mate haha! Looking forwards to Saturday :-) All the best!

@TelfordO Год назад

Hi Luke, timely video as i have been looking at a filters, currently i have a CLS for my dslr camera but find it vitually useless. Thanks for the upload. Concrats on the 8k subs Ron.

@lukomatico Год назад

Thank you Ron! - I've had limited success with CLS filters in the past, I think they are just too aggressive for shooting broadband with! - The LPS D2 (think there's a newer one out now too) seems to be much more usable at least so I'm happy for that! Clear skies!

@deep_space_dave Год назад

Hey Luke! Awesome comparison of LP vs NON LP filters. I personally use the IDAS LPS D3 in my Bortle 8.4 location and I found out the hard way that this filter is the only way to go in my light polluted skies. I recently posted on social media (you're a follower :-) an image using the IDAS LPS D3. I tried imaging galaxies without it and looks like I will have to throw away 2hrs worth of data 😞. The IDAS LPS D3 has been a game changer for me when shooting broadband and I can reserve my IDAS NBZ's (UHS and Regular) for moon lit skies. You are a lot like me when it comes to experimentation, this adds more fun to this hobby! CS!

@lukomatico Год назад

Thank you so much Dave!! :-D it's great to hear your experience with the D3 is really positive mate, and the NBZ too - I've been so impressed by my IDAS filters 👍👍 Totally agree re: the astro experiments mate, they are a heap of fun haha! :-D Thanks for watching and clear skies!

@josephluciani5531 Год назад

Once more Luke, you provide us with a gem of a video. I really appreciate this one!!! I’m in a B7-8 location and have been imaging galaxies without a filter, however, after watching your comparison, my sense is that a broadband filter would allow me to capture a bit more signal-a “slight” bit 😊 I applaud your knack for producing videos that help answer the “should I, shouldn’t I” decisions we all have to make with this hobby. Having previously assumed that BB isn’t a great idea for galaxies, this was a valuable and somewhat shocking revelation. One question important to me, do you feel there would be a post-processing advantage (especially with color) between a BB vs. a non-filter image?

@lukomatico Год назад

Thank you Joe!! - I'm so happy you liked this video mate :-) It's an interesting question you raise, I do believe the light-pollution filtered image would be more forgiving to process as sky gradients and such are more strongly suppressed, leading to an overall simpler experience! - Thank you again for watching and raising a great question!

@litacatalin3261 Год назад

Awesome video with the kind of comparasition I wanted to do for myself.Surely seeing conditions make a difference one night after another.I have de Idas D3 version, wich is a combo of D2 and the original LPS, as I know.I am very pleased with it, shooting from B6-B7 sky in my hometown.Ckear sky Luke and keep them comming! 🙂

@lukomatico Год назад

Fantastic to hear that Lita! - Thank you so much for taking the time to watch, comment and share your own experience too! :-) Clear skies!

@AstroPixUK Год назад

Great vid Luke. Useful and a really good comparison. Do you think the quality optics of the RASA may have given you this change in perspective from when you ran this test before

@lukomatico Год назад

Hey Jim! - that's a good question mate! If I recall correctly, I actually last tested light pollution filters with an Esprit 80, so optics shouldn't have limited things I guess! :-) Thanks for watching!

@AstroSoundscape Год назад

Interesting question Luke! I've kinda had mixed results using my LPro with my OSC(533mc), although haven't done much testing to be honest. I tend to mainly use it more when I'm on brighter targets but when shooting fainter targets like the witches head for example, it seemed to cut too much out and I got better results with just a UV/IR. I guess though I'm also Bortle 5/6 so another factor. When I did those targets with stronger and signal though I think it did help. Nice overview Pal, good work. 👍 Clear skies soon !

@lukomatico Год назад

Superb points Ollie! - it's definitely gonna take some more experimentation for me to figure out the way forward with this from my location, it's really interesting to hear how they turned out for you by the way - something to really think about! - thanks for watching buddy :-D

@dumpydalekobservatory Год назад

Interesting comparison Luke I've got a Baader IR cut filter to use when I get round to imaging any broadband targets, although I've got tilt that needs sorting out first so might go back to imaging with a refractor for a while. Nice to see the IDAS filter performing well I'm assuming these were both shot with the RASA 8?

@lukomatico Год назад

Both shot with the RASA 8 bud, you've got it! :-) A change is as good as a rest mate, perhaps the refractor will be a bunch of fun for a bit! Good luck with that tilt, I'm sure you'll get it sorted!

@dumpydalekobservatory Год назад

@@lukomatico I think I'm gonna need it lol

@AZ4Runner Год назад

very interesting comparison Luke!

@lukomatico Год назад

Thank you so much Jason!! :-) Clear skies mate!

@SinCityDarkKnight Год назад

your timing is impeccable! that's next week's target with my RASA 8 idas LPS-D3 😂🤙. thanks for that, Luke! cheers from, @ the MilkyWheyObservatory

@lukomatico Год назад

That's awesome bud, haha!! :-D Wishing you the best of luck and clearest of skies for the capture man!

@siegfriednoet Год назад

Very interesting video Luke, thank you for this. I use Optolong flters, but I will also try this comparison myself, makes me curious now seeing this But first need some clear skies, still lots of clouds here in Belgium, but it looks to get better, hope so

@lukomatico Год назад

Thank you Siegfried! - It'd be really interesting to hear how this comparison goes for you if you get the chance to test! :-) I hope that your weather turns better soon, it sounds like you've had a real rough patch lately! All the best my friend!

@tullyfisher Год назад

Interesting video Luke. For me "unfiltered" looks (partly much) better (sharper and higher contrast) to my eyes as well. Clear skies mate! :)

@lukomatico Год назад

Thank you so much mate! - I've really enjoyed seeing all the different opinions on this one, everyone has been making great points!

@Tony-Elliott Год назад

Hi Luke from what I can make out after the RU-vid compression I think the filtered image looks better ,more contrast and definition,

@lukomatico Год назад

Thanks Anthony mate! - I have to say I was really impressed by the LP filtered data, it surprised me how well it performed! :-) I think I probably need a few extra bits of testing but all signs currently point to it being generally a good choice to shoot with it! Clear skies bud!

@JonnyBravo0311 Год назад

Ultimately, light pollution filters work by blocking certain wavelengths. The problem with that approach is that not only are you blocking the light emanating from terrestrial sources (street lamps, etc), but also you are blocking that same light coming from those stars and galaxies. The filter cannot distinguish between the sources of the light. Some filters are far better than others, as they block narrower bands, thus preserving the overall color better. Fun fact - most mono filter sets (including the Chroma LRGB I use) have a "notch" between the G and R. It's there specifically to block out the sodium vapor emission line. However, it's not perfect. It doesn't just block 589nm. In fact, the green starts to drop off around 578nm and the red doesn't really get to peak transmission until about 603nm. That means I've pretty much eliminated yellow altogether (since it runs from about 570 to 600nm).

@lukomatico Год назад

All great points mate! - Thank you for sharing! I used to be very much in the "no filters for broadband" camp, let the whole spectrum come through unattenuated and let stacking sort the wheat from the chaff mostly - it does seem some of the high quality broadband LP filters we have today though are capable of very selective blocking, which while still damaging to a broadband signal, is perhaps less damaging overall than allowing the whole slew of light pollution in with the desired signal! I suspect it's a bit of a balancing act, and results probably would vary on a case-by-case basis, based on optics used, target selected and local sky conditions I suppose :-) Thanks for watching!

@HeavenlyBackyardAstronomy Год назад

Hi Luke, Yes, there has been a dramatic advancement in the quality of filters over the past few years. Targets that I never would have tried in the past are now becoming a reality for me ... for example, the Heart Nebula. I could never get that one until I acquired the Optolong L-eNhanced filter. Speaking of the weather, I've been noticing it is not only your location but basically, globally. The UK, Australia / New Zealand, Norway, SE US, and even the desert region of Arizona. Hopefully, this will all clear up soon.

@lukomatico Год назад

Thank you so much for the insight Pat my friend! - I agree totally that targets previously unreachable are now completely doable thanks to these fantastic filters and cameras! :-) RE: your mention of the weather situation globally, - hearing your thoughts and knowing they are coming from someone with such a deep knowledge of meteorology such as yourself - that's quite ominous to read!! I do hope things level out a bit soon. Thank you so much for watching mate, I hope you are keeping well!

@AstroDork Год назад

Another great video Luke and I was recently wondering this myself as there are a small number of peeps who use BB LP filters instead of Lum in a filter wheel when imaging in mono. Im also in Bortle 7 so have just bought an Optolong L Pro and put in my FW so tonight I'm planning to grab some M33 and B33 with both filters plus a few colour so I can stack and compare. BTW your Topaz code has apparently expired

@lukomatico Год назад

Hey there Dan! - It's an interesting idea for sure! I reckon some of these modern BB LP filters could absolutely be worth using as a Lum, it'd be interesting to hear how your experiment goes mate! RE: Topaz - If you're looking to purchase it and want to help support the channel by doing so, then my affiliate link/code should still work fine bud, but the discount code has indeed expired unfortunately! - Topaz recently changed their discount code approach so every affiliate with 'permanent' codes like mine got theirs cancelled, they now only allow pre-approved/planned "campaigns" which isn't ideal! Still, I can't knock Topaz too badly, it's a superb product and the affiliate system continues to really help me out actually, so it's not all bad haha! :-) Hope you have a superb weekend bud!

@jonbasstro1413 Год назад

Hi Luke, nice comparison video. The IDAS filter did very well in the cropped images, more Ha being collected and overall sharpness. Though side by side at full size I thought they looked equally great, the only difference being the darker hues in the unfiltered (UV/IR cut) image. I wonder if this could be a more "natural" colour to our eyes if there is such a thing in space. I've done a few very short EAA sessions (when breaks in the clouds permit ) on bright broadband DSO's lately and always use the UV/IR cut which gives great results, though I think I will also have to mix it up a bit with a LP filter some time and compare. Lets hope we get some clear skies soon.

@lukomatico Год назад

Thanks so much Jon! You raise a lot of interesting points there mate, I think in my case the tradeoff in colour accuracy is possibly worth the gain in snr & ease of processing, it's overall still difficult to say for sure and I'd likely need to test further I guess! It's probably one of those things that will vary from location to location and also based on individual tastes too 👍👍 I hope it clears properly soon mate and you can have a good testing session, I'd be interested to hear how it goes!

@jonbasstro1413 Год назад

Will keep you updated Luke.Hopefully in the week after the current full moon I’ll run an EAA session with the two filters on a bright DSO. Clear skies.

@sevenskiesastro Год назад

Great video Luke. Them light pollution filters definitely help in my experience. Clear skies mate.

@lukomatico Год назад

Thanks so much Rob! - It does seem like these newer filters are a cut above what I was used to previously, very promising result! :-) Hope you have a great weekend ahead! - I appreciate your support bud, clear skies!

@juno1666 Год назад

Hi Luke and thanks again for another great video! I saw another comment about color calibration (PCC to be specific). Were these comparison images color calibrated? The only reason that I ask is that For the past few years, I have used a IDAS LPS D-1 filter for imaging broadband in my Bortle 7 skies. For my last 3 broadband targets, I have used a ZWO uv/ir cut filter and I really have enjoyed the results. My neighborhood has recently changed the Na vapor streetlights to led and the really blare ( there is one in my front yard). The worst of the lp is to my east and my western sky is blocked by trees, so I have to image in this mess. The uv/ir cut filter data seems much easier to process with less need to do color tweaking in Curves. I remember that you also found this to be true in he past. Just wanted to pass along my experiences Anyway, thanks for the terrific video and looking forward to more! Jim

@lukomatico Год назад

Thank you so much for the insightful reply Jim, and my apologies for the late reply! These were not done with PCC, just background neutralization as far as I remember - I wanted to remove any variables I could but in doing so, may have inadvertently added others haha - such is life! You're 100% right by the way, I did indeed always have better results without a LP filter on broadband, but it seems the D2 is working so well with the RASA right now that I need to do more testing probably to really figure this out for my skies! I appreciate your feedback hugely mate, thank you for taking the time to share. Clear skies!

@juno1666 Год назад

@@lukomatico The least that I can do! Thanks Luke for all of your hard work making these extremely helpful and informative videos! I’m still grinning every time that I use Bill’s Star Reduction tools! Jim

@stephencox3446 Год назад

Interesting comparison Luke. For me I see a marginal difference in the two sides but favour the one with the filter. Is it one of these cases where you expect to see a massive difference, but you don't and are left wondering if it is all down to individual taste? You have inspired me to replicate your test from here in North Lincolnshire (Bortle 5) if I ever get clear skies. Keep up with the videos Luke, they are inspiring.

@lukomatico Год назад

That's awesome to hear mate! - I do think the same, that it's largely down to personal taste with things like this! :-) I hope your skies clear soon and you can have a go at this from your skies, - my personal guess: I expect maybe unfiltered will give the most pleasing result from a b5? Thanks for watching!

@billblanshan3021 Год назад

Thanks for taking the time to do this test! Interesting results 🤔 I think it's time for you to go to dual rasa8 setup so your comparisons are done at the same time, lol 😜

@lukomatico Год назад

Hahah!! Thanks bro! Man, a dual rasa8 setup would be nuts 😝 It really surprised me how this turned out, I'm still not 100% convinced about going filtered for BB, but this initial test was very eye opening and promising! Thank you!

@Mel-127 Год назад

Hi Luke. My next possible challenge is filters !!! Looking at these two comparisons and reading the comments, It much reminded me of purchasing a DSLR. I like the warm looking photo, (Cannon). But there again I like the cool true to eye looking photo, (Nikon). The other considering factor is I like the right photo but my pocket shouts for the left photo. 🤣 Interesting video. Well selected topic. Thank you. Clear sky's to you.

@lukomatico Год назад

Thank you so much for watching! That's a great analogy BTW haha :-D I think the question of "to filter, or not to filter" is a tough one as there's so many factors at play I guess, I don't envy the challenge ahead of you my friend! I'd be tempted to just shoot unfiltered for a while and see how it goes from your location before making a move - you may be pleasantly surprised! (or, you may feel the urge to buy a light pollution filter begin to spike!) Thanks again for your comment! - Good luck!

@pnjunction5689 Год назад

Nice comparison. Would be interesting to see the differences after a photometric color calibration of both images.

@josephluciani5531 Год назад

I’d also love to see such a comparison

@lukomatico Год назад

Noted! - That would have been great to test for sure :-) Thanks for the suggestion mate!

@lukomatico Год назад

Thanks Joe! :-)

@JJherne Год назад

I’ve been testing something similar recently but without any filter at all. Ok I don’t have an IR cut filter but I’ve been out shooting M31 without a filter and I actually quite like the results from my Bortle 5 skies and under an almost full moon. Perhaps a cut filter would give me some benefit but it does at least make me stop and question things before blindly purchasing something.

@lukomatico Год назад

Hey there mate! - Hope you're doing well :-) I reckon I'd be doing the same thing if I was shooting in B5 or lower, unfiltered images from those kinds of skies have the potential to be glorious for sure! :-D That's a great take-away too I think, question everything! Thanks so much for watching and giving your support mate!

@douglasgriffith393 Год назад

Thanks for sharing your results. My next target (should we ever get another clear, moonless night) will be M33; and this is exactly the decision I have been struggling with (although I have the LPS-D1 filter….main difference apparently is that the LPS-D2 is more effective suppressing LED lighting). I will go with the LPS-D1 filter. Clear skies!

@thomasnutter Год назад

m33 is my target tomorrow night in the north of england, looking forward to it, im all new to this :)

@lukomatico Год назад

Sounds like a plan Douglas! - I was really impressed at how well the D2 did in this side-by-side, I'm sure the D1 will be practically identical so I think you're on to a winner! Hoping for some clear skies soon for you!

@lukomatico Год назад

That's superb Thomas! - Good luck mate :-)

@Astrokhels Год назад

Awesome video again Luke. I use a IDAS D3 B5. I use it because everything is led in my village. Other than that I would have be shooting unfiltered or just UV. There is a difference but very slightly. D3 is led blocking .

@lukomatico Год назад

Interesting to hear mate, thank you for your insight!! :-D It sounds like the D3 is a particularly good fit for your shooting conditions there! Thanks for watching :-)

@AstroCloudGenerator Год назад

Interesting. I guess all images are subjective and although I’d bow to your better judgment, I’m really favouring the IR cut filter

@lukomatico Год назад

Thank you Richard! - It's very interesting to hear people's opinions on things like this as it seems preference for colour and contrast are quite subjective things I guess! :-)

@strelnikoff7 Год назад

Somehow left image (UV/IR cut?) seems sharper. Personally, sharper is … more sought after result. Then again, it could be that the end result (and processing pains) favor the filterred image.

@lukomatico Год назад

Hey mate! :-) totally agree with you that the left shot is sharper! I suspect that it was down to the seeing being different on the two nights but it's hard to say with 100% certainty I guess! I agree the end processed result would have helped, I'll remember for next time! 🙏 Thanks for watching bud!

@strelnikoff7 Год назад

@@lukomatico Great channel and content you have here! And I'm in the process of buying a filter to finally move to the well... more narrow band imaging. This was very helpful. And you're right, Bortle 4 or 5 and up - seeing conditions affect results significantly more than say ... Bortle 1 :)

@derekbaker3279 Год назад

Thank you Luke! 👍👍

@lukomatico Год назад

My pleasure! Thanks for watching Derek! :-)

@alneid2707 Год назад

Tough choice, Luke. I've been shooting dust in Cepheus and Taurus recently, so the darker one has an appeal from that perspective. Personal choice, I guess. I do wonder, however, if one of these has more potential than the other to reveal additional detail with a more complete processing.

@lukomatico Год назад

That's a great point well made bud, thank you! - I really should have added on a segment about how they react to rigorous processing, 100% agree! :-) Thank you for watching and leaving some great feedback mate, hope you enjoy the rest of your weekend!

@mashpotatomountainobserver3338 Год назад

Very surprised with the IDAS D3 filter on broadband targets. It really does cut way down on the LED light pollution and it let's nice color through as well as doing a kind of star reduction right at the scope before any processing even takes place. It does cut into some blue but not bad. Great comparison, Luke. We been having bad weather here too brother.

@lukomatico Год назад

Thank you bud!! It's good to hear the D3 is superb too by the sound of it, I reckon IDAS are making some of the best filters out there! Thanks for watching!

@iisunshinei1501 Год назад

Very helpful comparison i definetly perfer the unflitered but theres ups and downs but i think id use RGB filiters for targets in the future maybe a little HA but i now know that i wont use broadband filters

@lukomatico Год назад

Thank you for the feedback, I'm glad it was helpful my friend! :-) Good luck and clear skies!

@nikaxstrophotography Год назад

I use the L-pro for broadband and that works very well in bortle 6-7 skies where i am

@lukomatico Год назад

Good to know, Nik! - Thanks for stopping by and sharing your experience my friend! :-) Clear skies!

@TareqAstroPhoton Год назад

I have IDAS D2 filter and i tried it on only two targets and i didn't like, felt like it shifts a color or faded one color somehow, but with your images on the video as comparison maybe i have to think again and use it more, i hope it will be good, i won't buy D3 unless i sell D2 first if that D3 is way way much better, i am under Bortle 8/9.

@lukomatico Год назад

Hey there Tareq my friend! :-) I think due to your extreme light pollution it's a really challenging situation for sure - if you have the time to perform a comparison it may be worth a direct test from your area to check unfiltered vs filtered 👍👍 Thank you for watching!

@TareqAstroPhoton Год назад

@@lukomatico Hey my friend Luke, I will return back to imaging after so long time in break, and i will test my color camera against light pollution, i will first go with just a regular lum, if it will do a good job then most likely i won't use D2, and even maybe i will go with L-Pro which is also another filter that can shift colors a bit but less than D2/D3 ones, i might go back to try Baader Moon&Skyglow filter, if i will have issues then i will just leave color camera for stars and i just use mono for all data.

@peterturner1919 Год назад

Interesting comparison Luke, a Photoshop mediocrity like me would love to know if the unfiltered shot could be vastly improved through decent processing, some of these filters can cost a pretty penny, could you get away with basic gear and decent processing? Lovely to know..... Keep em coming Luke, clear skies to all hopefully.

@lukomatico Год назад

Interesting question Peter! - I do think it could be hugely improved by a rigorous processing routine, no doubt about it :-) That said, my gut feeling is that the filtered shot could be taken even further! How much further though is hard to say, it'd be a total guess at this point! Thanks so much for watching mate!

@IcemanAstro Год назад

I'm no expert or anything bro, but when I had my color camera , u would ALWAYS shoot with a LP filter. I just found that in post processing, it would be that much easier to work with. I live in a bortle 5 and for me it made the world of difference. Maybe just my skillset, but I always used it and I enjoyed the data regardless. Good comparison video though

@lukomatico Год назад

Thank you for the feedback bro!! - I think what you're saying matches what I've noticed too, the data is literally easier to work on! Great to know what you found bro, I do appreciate your time so much! Thanks for sharing :-D

@buggyland Год назад

Maybe it's the YT compression but I totally disagree except for preview4. I expect you should be able to get significantly more detail out of the unfiltered image with the right processing as there seems to be much more data. Thanks for sharing!

@lukomatico Год назад

Thank you so much for the feedback bud!! - I really appreciate hearing your opinion on the comparison mate, thank you for taking the time to share your thoughts and watch the vid! :-) Hope you have a super rest of your weekend!

@scottrk4930 Год назад

Do you ever sleep , or eat ? LOL . Always enjoy your Videos whatever Topic you decide to cover . Question , will there be more in the PixInsight Series ? Cheers./SRK

@lukomatico Год назад

Haha! :-D Thank you Scott, that's real kind of you to say my friend! As to PixInsight tutorial series, there will indeed be more parts coming! I'm thinking of a OSC duo-nb basic tutorial (the standard reds/blues tones), then a OSC duo-nb alternate version, perhaps exploring hubble palette with the same data. I also will make a mono HA-rgb video too at least! If people keep enjoying them then I'm happy to keep making them and processing different targets, the talk-throughs seem to resonate well with some folk and that's what it's really all about! :-)

@scottrk4930 Год назад

@@lukomatico That's great ! There are some 2600MC Pro Users and a few simple DSLR Noobs like myself that will benefit from all this . Thanks !/SRK

@KZgun4hire Год назад

To a complete amateur the image on the left with its higher contrast and sharper image made it for me. I really didn't like the grey washed out image on the right.

@lukomatico Год назад

That's really fair feedback Walter! - Thank you so much for taking the time to share your thoughts my friend :-)

@Masoch1st 5 месяцев назад

would suggest updating your ref links to the mini pc as there are way better ones for less money now. you can get n100s for 150 bucks..

@lukomatico 5 месяцев назад

That's a really great shout to be honest, thanks mate 👍 I'll get on with it when I'm next at my PC

@Masoch1st 5 месяцев назад

@@lukomatico no worries!! the n5015 was and still is a workhorse, but the n100 is like 2 or 3 generations newer and while it isn't much more powerful or anything, its still a better chip! 💪

@user-is6xv7mg2g Год назад

Great. Can I ask you to work with IMX429 again? Information is missing from other users.

@lukomatico Год назад

Hey mate! - I'm a bit stuck with that as I currently use my IMX429 as my guide camera for the deep-sky rig! My apologies!

@halloduda8142 Год назад

5:57 : Star forming region ;)

@lukomatico Год назад

Thank you! haha :-) Clear skies!

@area51xi Год назад

Other than color cast they look identical in every way to me.

@lukomatico Год назад

Thank you for the feedback bud! - I guess the video compression during rendering and uploading to YT has made any differences, which were already subtle, even harder to see. I appreciate you watching!

@vampolascott36 Год назад

I don't think any light pollution filter works. At least not for visual observing. Your best bet is to travel out to a dark sky site. I have Bortle class 2 skies within an hour's drive. It's really worth it.

@lukomatico Год назад

Thank you for the feedback mate! I can't say I've tried any filters visually before, that could be interesting to see! Thanks for watching! :-)

@vampolascott36 Год назад

@@lukomatico So cool that you replied! I've always been strictly visual and have been observing since the '70s. I'm just now getting my feet wet with astrophotography. It's just to have something to show people what I'm up too. I'm not going to buy a focal reducer or field flattener for my Takahashi FC-100DC anytime soon though. 😉 Have you seen how much those things cost? 😱

@lukomatico Год назад

I ended up in astrophotography for a similar reason really, I wanted to be able to share the views with more family/friends! :-) Re: the flattener, we're lucky I guess! they are pretty good priced here in the UK - The matched tak multi flattener is around £230 for us! 👍 Not cheap by any means, but cheap for something with Takahashi wrote on the side haha! :-D