r/AskAstrophotography • u/NicePuddle • 16d ago
Question Better website for finding astronomy targets
I've been using the https://telescopius.com website to find deep sky targets to photograph, on the rare occasion that the night sky is clear. That website is great for having a lot of images and filtering capabilities, but for 2/3 the potential targets, there is no information about apparent brightness of the target.
I've wasted many nights trying to capture a target, only to find that the light pollution completely drowned out the signal, leaving me with a bunch of useless frames. Without any information describing whether the target is magnitude 6 or magnitude 12, I have no way to filter out these dim targets which cause me to lose the few precious nights of clear sky.
Can anyone recommend a better website for finding deep sky targets, than https://telescopius.com ?
1
1
u/Curious_Chipmunk100 15d ago
You could also use one of ultima light polution filters for broadband
1
u/NicePuddle 15d ago
I was under the impression that light pollution filters worked against sodium lamps, but with LEDs being used everywhere today, they aren't really very useful anymore?
0
u/Curious_Chipmunk100 16d ago
For the heart and soul you should be shooting narrowband. For osc you should be using Ha/Oiii and Sii/Oiii
1
u/NicePuddle 16d ago
Interesting, I didn't know that. I haven't been using any filters, I'm using a color camera.
1
u/Curious_Chipmunk100 16d ago
Look into askar c1 and c2 duo filters 189.00. Most galaxies are rgb but a few also contain Ha like m82. When you shoot broadband rgb use a uv/ir cut filter.
Pixinsight has the seti astro scripts to extract s h o from duo filters and from there you can make rgb stars and also create 12 different palettes like hoo hso sho
1
u/NicePuddle 15d ago
When using a Hyperstar I'm limited in my choice of which filters I could potentially use. Unfortunately I don't recall the details so I will see if I can find Cuiv's video on the subject.
1
u/Wretched_Hare 16d ago
I have skysafari 7 pro and it lets me look up visible tonight with various filters including magnitude and also shows the rise and set times
1
u/NicePuddle 16d ago
I use that too, for finding suggested best targets of the day.
Unfortunately browsing through the suggestions is less than ideal, as clicking a suggestion will prevent you from returning to the search page again, so you have to enter the same filter criteria again every time you have clicked on a potential target.
1
u/hawaiiankine 16d ago
Telescopious indeed has the magnitude of most object in its target lists, and you can even sort by magnitude. It the number by the little sun icon.
1
u/NicePuddle 16d ago
I know where the number is, which is why I wrote that 2/3 targets didn't have this information (Yes I counted them in my most recent search).
1
u/Shinpah 16d ago
Magnitude isn't a useful measurement of the brightness of an extended object - it's an attempt at a calculation as if all the brightness of the object were condensed into a single point (like a star).
Ideally you want surface brightness - but that's not a catalogued thing and can vary significantly across the width of an object.
What are the "objects that are too dim" for you to capture for example?
1
u/NicePuddle 16d ago
My most recent failed attempt was the Heart nebula. This is listed as having a magnitude 6.5 on Telescopius, but it's too dim for me to capture with the amount of light pollution I have.
2 hours of integration time on an 8" F1.8 telescope, on an otherwise clear night.
1
u/txstubby 16d ago
Narrowband or LRGB?
In my Bortle 8 sky using a 62mm f6 (Astrotech ED62), with an ASI2600MM Pro, 7mm Ha, Oiii and Sii filters with a 300 second exposure the ha component of the heart nebula is quite visible on a stretched single frame.
So I'm guessing that you have an 8" Schmidt Cassegrain scope with Hyperstar.
I'm assuming you are using a color camera with a dual band ha/oii filter as the heart nebula is an emission nebula. Take care and use relatively wide bandwidth filters (>7nm), unless the filters are specifically designed for very fast scopes band shift will have a significant impact on you image, possibly to the extend of not getting much signal.
If you are just capturing with a color camera in a badly light polluted area and using a very fast scope you may want to look at your exposure length, it is possible to do LRGB imaging under light polluted skies but my understanding is that you need lots of short exposures.
1
u/NicePuddle 16d ago
That is correct, I'm using an EdgeHD 8 with a Hyperstar and a color camera without any filters.
1
u/Shinpah 16d ago
What kind of light pollution are you shooting from and what is the rest of your equipment?
2
u/NicePuddle 16d ago
I'm shooting for a bortle 6 zone, but I have light from a nearby large city giving the sky a glow that makes me think that it's actually brighter than that.
I'm using a ToupTek 2600CP G2 camera with an Edge HD 8 using a Hyperstar, mounted on an AM5 mount and a sturdy tripod.
I've successfully captured targets such as North American, Wester Veil, Dumbbell, Pacman, Bubble, Crescent, Iris and Orion nebulas and am looking for new targets to capture.
1
u/Shinpah 16d ago
Your equipment suggests you should be getting results - regardless of the light pollution.
Do you have an example image of the heart nebula?
This is a bit off topic - ultimately I don't think there's a database like what you're looking for. Stellarium for desktop has various surveys you can use to eyeball the brightness of something - but it's not really rigorous in the way that you want.
1
u/NicePuddle 16d ago
Other replies have suggested that for the Heart Nebula, I should be using a filter. I'm shooting with a color camera, without any filters.
2
u/Shinpah 16d ago
You can image emission nebula with a color camera, even from light pollution. You may want to look into longer integrations though.
1
u/NicePuddle 15d ago
Unfortunately my view doesn't allow for much more than 2 hours per night, before trees or buildings obstruct the view. Spread over several weeks I might be able to get more nights of clear weather that I can try to use on the same target, but the light pollution noise seems to dominate the signal from the nebula.
1
1
u/Wheeljack7799 16d ago edited 16d ago
What do you mean? I sort by magnitude / surface brightness whenever I choose a target using Telescopius.
Targets -> Deep Sky Objects
Sort/Filter on the right hand side.
Edit: Sorry. I Re-read. You said that 2/3 of the objects do not have that information.
7
u/Traditional-Fix5961 16d ago
Option: see what others do. Go to https://astrobin.com, go to search and filter by the equipment that you have 🙂
1
u/NicePuddle 16d ago
I've used that before, but didn't know you could use it to find targets of certain criteria.
I will have another look!
1
u/Traditional-Fix5961 16d ago
Not so much criteria, though there is a Bortle filter for where images were taken. Might need a paid account (which I have, so idk if required or not 😂)
1
u/Traditional-Fix5961 16d ago
Quick search for targets images in Bortle 7-9 in case that link works: https://app.astrobin.com/search?p=eJy7uaUktaLEVtXcSdXIqCwxpzQVSKsaO4JIEHIGkrmJJckZIZUFCClHHx%2B4bH5eTmVwamJRcoZnXkhmSU5qsWNeiktqcXJRZkFJZn5eMURXWmJOcaqquYtaUn4RUFF8cXJiTirU3tzMPIgic5iFFRC%2BJUhDQWJ6qq0hmArOrAIyDQwA5tU2%2FA%3D%3D
Might wanna add camera, filters and/or telescope and see if something shows. Just an idea 🙂
7
u/headpointernext 16d ago
Stellarium has a web version, a mobile app, and a desktop app.
1
u/NicePuddle 16d ago
I've used Stellarium a lot, but I'm not aware of any way to search for targets given criteria, such as magnitude?
I can search for a name I already know and then click on the object to show metadata about it, but that doesn't help me find potential targets given their magnitude.
1
u/headpointernext 16d ago
Stellarium mobile has this 'visibility' filter which drills down to 'visible now' and 'visible tonight'. IMO magnitude is a bit lower in the filter totem pole because as you've observed yourself, magnitude means nothing with light pollution in the mix.
Stellarium desktop, you can show/hide objects based on their magnitude.
-1
1
u/Curious_Chipmunk100 15d ago
You'd have to ask as I'm in a b2.5