Andyjr1515 Posted July 4, 2016 Author Report Share Posted July 4, 2016 5 minutes ago, Prostheta said: Orange and red have always been problematic for many people. I need to start using a grey card for the same purpose. The Hipshot bridge review I did last week was a nightmare for lighting. Maybe I should build a DIY softbox for product photography.... Yes - it drives me mad! I used to do quite a bit of astro photography and used to use software that was used for some of the Hubble photos to eke out the slightest details, contrasts and shades in some of the galaxies and nebulae...and yet I can't take a decent photo of a guitar that's right in front of me! Anyway, I'm pretty cool with what I see in front of me as a base for the next stages of the finishing. It's actually the back and sides that are bugging me at the moment. But that, as they say, is another story... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Prostheta Posted July 4, 2016 Report Share Posted July 4, 2016 Colour balance is often a fight between different qualities of light, or at least that is my understanding of it. One photo had reflections of a Spruce in our garden yet the colour quality of light whacked it into the blue. Adjusting that out made the reflection of the green weird and threw it all out elsewhere. Like I said, I think I need to make a collapsible lit box for future product review photography.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andyjr1515 Posted July 4, 2016 Author Report Share Posted July 4, 2016 You see, the red works on this one!!!! Taken in my back garden with a relatively modest setup but with some wizz-bang software to ease the detail out of the shot, a tracked exposure of 15minutes, stacked with a second shot at 1 minute to avoid burnout of the central cluster of (very new) stars. Anyway, final try and then I'll give up trying to share what it actually is looking like so far. This is with Tungsten Light white balance and starts showing the amber: However, you need to ignore the upper bout....it's not that colour at all Anyway...I'm moving onto the back and neck 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
psikoT Posted July 4, 2016 Report Share Posted July 4, 2016 Do you need a huge telescope to get that nebula shot? I think is fascinating.., any chance to see more of them? (Sorry for off-topic) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andyjr1515 Posted July 4, 2016 Author Report Share Posted July 4, 2016 28 minutes ago, psikoT said: Do you need a huge telescope to get that nebula shot? I think is fascinating.., any chance to see more of them? (Sorry for off-topic) No problem with the off-topic - I've given up trying to take a decent photo of the LP anyway The telescope is a refractor (lenses rather than mirrors) at 110mm aperture and around 1m long. Then there's a smaller scope that piggybacks which tracks a random star and sends signals to the powered mount to keep that star in the centre of view. That means that the object that the main scope is looking at then appears to stay in one spot and you then can get exposures of up to around an hour (although 15mins is usually adequate) to capture the very, very, very faint light coming from them. A few more and then I suppose it had better be back to guitars: The gaseous remains of a star that's died, but not gone supernova, the Dumbell Nebula: Two galaxies in the process of merging into one, the Whirlpool galaxy: And the nearest galaxy to us, Andromeda: 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andyjr1515 Posted July 4, 2016 Author Report Share Posted July 4, 2016 By the way - don't get carried away and go and buy a telescope expecting to see these....the best you see with the naked eye is a much smaller exceptionally faint fuzzy patch! If you're lucky.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Prostheta Posted July 4, 2016 Report Share Posted July 4, 2016 This is a community, Andy....not a strict on-focus therapy group! That we've all got skills, enthusiasms and experiences outside of guitar-making just enriches everything we do. @pan_kara works on imaging the very small (or at least, the remnants) and you image the very large. The diversity of the people who come through here is just amazing....it never fails to astonish me! 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Prostheta Posted July 4, 2016 Report Share Posted July 4, 2016 I think we need a photo of the telescope! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
psikoT Posted July 4, 2016 Report Share Posted July 4, 2016 Well, I got shocked.., those are awesome shots. I didn't know that you could reach so far away with a lens telescope... and yes, we need a photo of it. ^^ Thanks very much for the show, Really appreciated. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
psikoT Posted July 4, 2016 Report Share Posted July 4, 2016 Now I'm just wondering how can you take a clear picture of a galaxy while Hubble needed the Mt. Wilson observatory to discover them... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Prostheta Posted July 4, 2016 Report Share Posted July 4, 2016 I'm sure that 80-90yrs of imaging technology helps. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Prostheta Posted July 4, 2016 Report Share Posted July 4, 2016 Either that or Andy's back garden is in Chile. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andyjr1515 Posted July 4, 2016 Author Report Share Posted July 4, 2016 1 hour ago, Prostheta said: Either that or Andy's back garden is in Chile. No...most of the time my back garden is just chilly 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andyjr1515 Posted July 4, 2016 Author Report Share Posted July 4, 2016 3 hours ago, psikoT said: Now I'm just wondering how can you take a clear picture of a galaxy while Hubble needed the Mt. Wilson observatory to discover them... 1 hour ago, Prostheta said: I'm sure that 80-90yrs of imaging technology helps. Yes - this. The development of the ccd for digital cameras and video recorders plus the ridiculously open sharing that goes on in the astro software development has transformed this. I have photos that are much better than those from reputable text books of a decade earlier...theirs from major observatories and mine from a backyard webcam. For anyone with the interest and clear skies, it's a great time to pick up the hobby. Based on the latter criterion, that generally rules out the UK, of course if I get a moment tomorrow, I'll post some planetary shots Mars, Jupiter, Saturn. Done differently to the above shots - actually done with just a £30 webcam but with some stupendously clever - and free - software 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ScottR Posted July 5, 2016 Report Share Posted July 5, 2016 15 hours ago, Andyjr1515 said: yet I can't take a decent photo of a guitar that's right in front of me! It's a well established fact, documented times innumerable on this very forum that taking pictures of guitars is infinitely more difficult than building them. SR 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Prostheta Posted July 5, 2016 Report Share Posted July 5, 2016 Totally. I hope I can tackle this. Hey. We're at Jupiter again! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andyjr1515 Posted July 6, 2016 Author Report Share Posted July 6, 2016 Just a couple more and then I'll move back to guitars These below are a few planet photos. Saturn: Mars - see the white dust storm at the bottom and the light patch in the middle of the lighter patch in the bottom hemisphere which is an extinct volcano on the surface of mars as seen through a £30 web cam from my back light-polluted patio! A random shot of the moon, showing shadows from some of the mountain ranges: and Jupiter: The technology is completely different but just as clever. The exposures are actually very short because the objects are so bright. However, the effect of the atmospheric movement is so great at high magnification, that a single shot would be utterly distorted. So - take a standard webcam and take a 30 seconds or so video of it....maybe 2000 frames worth. Then run the video through some stunning and free software that: Chooses the best, maybe 30, shots out of the 2000 lines them up, stacks them decides common pixel features that are therefore there and reject ones that are not common and are therefore optical aberations Hey presto - a pretty respectable photo. The real enthusiasts who know what they are doing produce space-telescope quality photos from the ground with exactly the same technology, and which make the above look utterly basic! 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andyjr1515 Posted July 6, 2016 Author Report Share Posted July 6, 2016 Oh - and yes - the telescope: An in-focus shot: And an out of focus shot to give a size perspective - this is the same patio you usually see my workmate on with a guitar being butchered You can see the main scope (white) and the small blue tracking scope. The mount has motor control on two axes and is lined up to follow the axis of the earth rotation. A sensor fitted to the eyepiece of the tracking scope sends a signal to the motors to correct any perceived motion in the star it is locked onto. Then the main scope, which will be centred on the object you are looking at, will appear to be completely stable, allowing the camera fixed in its eyepiece to be on for significant exposure times. The camera itself is supercooled internally to minimise electronic scatter (that looks like tiny stars!) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
psikoT Posted July 6, 2016 Report Share Posted July 6, 2016 Those are really cool pictures... very nice! I also was wondering about the light-back pollution in big cities, but as I can see, that's not a big issue. I don't want to think anymore about this, otherwise I will end myself buying a telescope... Thanks very much for showing us your creations, they're absolutely amazing. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ScottR Posted July 6, 2016 Report Share Posted July 6, 2016 What he said! SR 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Prostheta Posted July 6, 2016 Report Share Posted July 6, 2016 Hmmmm.....what kind of resolution and bit depth can the camera put out? I'm wondering if DSLR video would produce better results? I'm sure you've thought of that already of course. This is one of my favourite videos of handheld camera zoom power, unfortunately a camera with a lens that cannot be changed: 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Prostheta Posted July 6, 2016 Report Share Posted July 6, 2016 It also demonstrates atmospheric distortion very nicely.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andyjr1515 Posted July 6, 2016 Author Report Share Posted July 6, 2016 OK - back to guitars I've pretty much finished the back and sides. Just got to decide what to do with the (very light coloured) neck now and then I can start re-assembly. I'm picking up a bunch of ivory plastics (pickup rings, etc, etc) and amber knobs from the owner this evening. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andyjr1515 Posted July 6, 2016 Author Report Share Posted July 6, 2016 5 minutes ago, Prostheta said: It also demonstrates atmospheric distortion very nicely.... Great video! The Canon DSLR's are very popular - they even do one with a built in infra-red filter to tame some of the colour issues, particularly for the gas spectra of gaseous nebulae. The chips are so good that you don't even really need cooling! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andyjr1515 Posted July 6, 2016 Author Report Share Posted July 6, 2016 16 minutes ago, Prostheta said: It also demonstrates atmospheric distortion very nicely.... It also demonstrates how fast the earth is turning - I'm assuming that the camera is static and therefore the moon's apparent movement across the screen is the earth's rotation? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.