Want to try my m31 data?

[EricFD]

Thanks for trying.

How much shorter do you think I should go? The subs for this were 58 and 52 seconds (after a while I got a slight trail so I shortened the time).

Maybe I should reduce to ISO 800, it was shot at 1600.

It's hard to say. I don't know the LP conditions in your area. It's just something you're going to have to play around with until you get results that you're satisfied with.

What is your normal exposure time?

And if you have a serious LP problem, there's nothing wrong with using a narrowband filter while doing imaging. Lots of astrophotographers do it.

[Fuzz]

I'm aware that RAW is not a format. I was merely responding to blaise's locution, "fits (raw) format". His words, not mine!

TIFFs are fine. TIFFs are a "loseless" form of a file, as opposed to a JPEG which is a "losey" compression format. There is no data lost in TIFF compression. I store all of my images in the TIFF format.

Got it! Thanks for the clarification. I do a lot of "regular" photography and see lots of people getting wrapped around the axle on "RAW" versus JPEG, so it's probably some of that frustration coming through!

[corpusse]

It's hard to say. I don't know the LP conditions in your area. It's just something you're going to have to play around with until you get results that you're satisfied with.

What is your normal exposure time?

And if you have a serious LP problem, there's nothing wrong with using a narrowband filter while doing imaging. Lots of astrophotographers do it.

I'm currently using a orion skyglow imaging filter. it certainly does help. M31 maybe is just too low. Also some of these images were taken around 4am and the sun is already creeping up just after 4.

I am in the white zone for light pollution which doesn't help much at all.

[Fuzz]

corpusse, don't be disheartened. Because M31 is so large and bright and we've seen so many great professional images, everyone expects it to be a very easy target. In fact, it is one of the hardest IMO. The large bright core makes it very hard. I myself haven't figured out just the right processing for M31 yet either.

[EricFD]

I'm currently using a orion skyglow imaging filter. it certainly does help. M31 maybe is just too low. Also some of these images were taken around 4am and the sun is already creeping up just after 4.

I am in the white zone for light pollution which doesn't help much at all.

No, certainly being in the white zone certainly doesn't help.

Maybe it would be better to try imaging M31 during a different time of year. October or November is a good month to image M31.

I could see the glow from the sun in the image while I was processing it. I had to crop it out of the image.

Better to take an image of M31 when it's highest in the sky because the light from it has to travel through less atmosphere, and you can image it earlier when it's darker.

P.S.

Sorry, I had to edit myself. I was thinking about Ursa Major, and not Andromeda. Contrary to what I said, Andromeda is not a circumpolar constellation, unless you live very far North! lol I'm a little tired.

[Fuzz]

I could see the glow from the sun in the image while I was processing it. I had to crop it out of the image.

That's not the sun. That is most likely amp glow. The glow is in the same direction as M32. M32 and the sun are on opposite sides of M31.

[EricFD]

That's not the sun. That is most likely amp glow. The glow is in the same direction as M32. M32 and the sun are on opposite sides of M31.

Oh you mean the glow at the bottom right of the image? OK, I see now.

[EricFD]

But try taking an image of M31 in October or November, Corpusse. I think you will see that you will much better results when it's higher in the sky, and you can image it much earlier at night.

[Fuzz]

corpusse, I just downloaded the TIFF file and loaded in Photoshop. There is something very weird going on in there. Something is not right, and it's not the exposure necessarily. I've gotten better raw data from 30-sec and 10-min exposures, with the dust lanes clearly evident with both exposures. But in your image, there is absolutely nothing. And very sharp-edged gradients to the core - I've never seen that. Maybe it is the light pollution or early morning light. I'd say try it earlier in the night like Eric suggested, and longer exposures.

[blaise]

Eric, thanks for clearing that up for me. Somewhere in that cloudy haze I call a brain I think I knew that information, but neglected to access it.

Fuzz, I appreciate so much of what you have to offer. I often reflect on what you've posted. I would ask just one thing, and please don't take this the wrong way; exercise tact. Often you seem to be lacking it. If I need to clarify, I have found that when your notions of procedure or understanding of something is challenged, you get very defensive and matter of fact. I have seen this with a few of your posts here and there. We're all here to learn. It could just be my way of interpreting your responses, and if so, I apologize.