Is Global Warming Responsible for My Amazing Astrophotography?

[Andy Resnick]

It's awesome because I am able to be outside imaging during January. No snow on the ground and not unreasonably cold. This is the first year I've been able to consistently image Orion- here's a full-frame and 100% crop of Orion Nebula, 21m total exposure, 800/5.6 ISO varied from 640-2000, 6s exposures, minimal post-processing (color, contrast, etc.), the posterization is from the file conversion, I think.

Last night was exceptionally clear (for Cleveland), so I tried to capture the Horsehead nebula knowing that it is a challenge for those of us without specialized filters and sensors. I'm posting this only because you can actually see a faint shadow, 21 minutes at ISO 4000 (!), with post-processing contrast adjustment set practically to a step function:

Alas, the clouds are moving back in...

 

[Bandersnatch]

Come now. A warm winter is no better a proof of global warming than a cold one is a disproof.

This is a global, long-term issue, that can't be judged by how much snow is behind one's window.

Great pictures though. :)

 

[CalcNerd]

Well, NASA certainly buys into the Global warming theory. And my recollection of severe winters and average temperatures of 40 years seems to also agree with the data. I am originally from the plains in the Midwest where aside from the more severe storms, the winters seem a lot milder.

 

[russ_watters]

It's awesome because I am able to be outside imaging during January. No snow on the ground and not unreasonably cold. This is the first year I've been able to consistently image...

What, you don't own a shovel and a jacket? Besides, the telescope and laptop do most of the work while you're inside sitting on the couch! To me this is an issue of commitment...

Nice pics, though.

[more helpful...]
If you haven't looked into remote control solutions, you should. I've still got some ground to cover, but all of my monitoring and much of my control is done from my couch. My telescope is fairly close -- about 20' away, which puts it in range of a USB cable. From there, a hub connects to telescope control and cameras.

One of my biggest current limitations is focus shift due to temperature instability. It means I often have to go outside and refocus as much as once an hour. I'll need to work on that...

 

[davenn]

One of my biggest current limitations is focus shift due to temperature instability. It means I often have to go outside and refocus as much as once an hour. I'll need to work on that...

remotely driven focus motor
they are available... focus motors, that is

 

[Andy Resnick]

Thanks for the comments-

Come now.

Well,

No need to be so serious!

Besides, the telescope and laptop do most of the work while you're inside sitting on the couch!

You must suffer for your art! :)

If you haven't looked into remote control solutions, you should. I've still got some ground to cover, but all of my monitoring and much of my control is done from my couch. My telescope is fairly close -- about 20' away, which puts it in range of a USB cable. From there, a hub connects to telescope control and cameras.

One of my biggest current limitations is focus shift due to temperature instability. It means I often have to go outside and refocus as much as once an hour. I'll need to work on that...

If I set up a permanent mount, I agree remote control would be nice. You are right about thermal drift- even if I pre-cool the lens, I have to fine-tune the focus every few minutes or so for another hour until everything settles.

Here's after post-processing:

 

[russ_watters]

If I set up a permanent mount, I agree remote control would be nice.

My mount is semi-permanent in that it is sitting on a tripod on my deck, under a cover, and has been for about 2 years. I don't have an observatory/dome, but by far the hardest/most time consuming part of the setup is the alignment, so leaving the mount outside is a big help.

 

[Chronos]

The problem with the global warming issue is sample size and modeling. Earth's climate has historically varied over cycles spanning thousands of years, yet we feign the ability to modify it based on weak short term [about a century] data and undeniably uncertain climate models.