0.00
#... |
|---|
| I live in a class 6 bortle zone and on the app I use now to see were stuff is in the sky i can change the atmosphere light and was wondering what class bortle zone people here are in so i can look at their pictures to get a good idea of what it looks like. |
0.00
#... |
|---|
|
I live in a German City with a Population of 600,000. Also I live very close to the city center. Depending on the direction I am aiming and the sky transparency I would say I am under Bortle 7-8 skies. You should be able to see my results clicking on my user name. Most of my images there were taken from my balcony. |
11.14
#... |
|---|
| I visually rate my sky as Bortle 5 but there are directions where the situation is worse. I always try to image when objects are as high as possible in my local sky. One other thing which is very important is to have good skills first on taking and applying flats and then in gradient removal using the processing software of your choice. In my experience, any dedicated astrophotography software is much better on this, than photoshop. |
12.53
#... |
|---|
Bottle 6 for me...  . feel free to come look at my stuff. I usually use either a duo narrow band filter or a General LP filter but sometimes no filter or just a H-alpha filter.
|
8.04
#...
·
1
like
|
|---|
|
I'd like Bortle scale to be as mandatory as the other details such as whether the subject is a deep sky or solar object and whether it was taken from Home, Traveller etc. It would be very useful because I often find myself attempting to image targets I have seen which are impossible from my location. Carole |
1.91
#... |
|---|
| I was in a Bortle 6 zone when I moved in to my current house. Unfortunately, I am now under Bortle 7 skies and nothing other than narrowband is a waste of time except if your target is the moon. In my opinion, RGB might be a realistic option under Bortle 5 or lower since my second location benefits from Bortle 4 skies and it is a notorious difference. |
|
0.00
#... |
|---|
I am now under Bortle 7 skies and nothing other than narrowband is a waste of time Well, I partially agree but somewhat also disagree. No equipment or technique can fully substitute a dark sky but lots of exposure time can produce some decent results if surface brightness of the object is high enough. This or this image was taken from my bortle 7.5 balcony using no filter. Also there is a guy shooting some decent shots from Tokyo. But yes, narrowband / mono is the best option for urban astrophotography. |
1.51
#... |
|---|
| Bortle 4. I shoot my wide-field shots without any filters. |
 #... |
|---|
|
Okinawa, Japan, Bortle 4-5 (depending on azimuth), no filters for FL=360mm+, a light pollution filter for 135mm and less (all with a DSLR). Simple is best while less is more. Certainly, under Bortle 6 you may need band filters and / or insanely long integration, sometimes splitting a session into several days, as many city light imagers showcase -- with surprising results though. Effective filters can cost a fortune, in that it is wise to select one (or two) well. Likely, I am not the best case study since I do not own any band filters for deepsky and usually do not integrate over an hour (our mostly cloudy sky won't let me anyway, in spite of favorable Bortle 4). Perhaps, I would invest a little more if we had longer periods of clear weather at nighttime. Your mileage along the sky may vary :-) All the very best and Cheers Robert |
|
1.91
#... |
|---|
Marius Bednar: Hello Marius. Nice images but the STC astroduo is a narrowband filter with dual bandpass and same for the optolong L-Pro. As for the latter, they are what I call CLS type or limited broadband considering filtered lines (mercury and others). True, I also use my Astronomik CLS in most of my images especially for the L channel, but still in the narrowband family for me. What I meant is pure RGB. As a matter of fact, you mentioned surface brightness and I might consider an experiment or two on RGB globular clusters to see how it goes. Cheers |
3.31
#... |
|---|
Unfortunately, I am now under Bortle 7 skies and nothing other than narrowband is a waste of time except if your target is the moon. Check out my gallery, Guy. I live about 15 km from Philadelphia, PA under Bortle 7-8 skies and image next to two LED street lights. Broadband is definitely possible under those conditions. I just did 12 galaxy images this past galaxy season. Some were easier than others and some definitely turned out better than others, but I don't consider any of them to have been a waste of time. |
|
1.91
#... |
|---|
Chris Sullivan: interesting gallery. You mentioned to have a roof observatory. You mean on top of the house? If so, have you tried comparing images from the backyard? I am wondering how much of a difference does it make to image a few meters higher from the ground to avoid direct street and neighboring lights on your frames. |
|
0.00
#... |
|---|
but the STC astroduo is a narrowband filter with dual bandpass and same for the The duo narrowband Filter was only used additionally to better capture H alpha regions, the majority of the exposures were taken without filter. |
|
3.31
#... |
|---|
Chris Sullivan:interesting gallery. You mentioned to have a roof observatory. You mean on top of the house? If so, have you tried comparing images from the backyard? I am wondering how much of a difference does it make to image a few meters higher from the ground to avoid direct street and neighboring lights on your frames. No, it's nothing like that and not an observatory at all. I have a flat tar roof above what was once the garage (currently it's our kitchen/office) and I just image from up there mainly because it's least obstructed by trees and other roofs compared to the ground (the theft protection is a huge bonus as well though). Imaging anywhere else on my property would give me next to no visible sky. My property is just surrounded by tall trees (half of which aren't ours). Even now, I can only get about 2-4 hours on any subject per night and some constellations that are visible from here are just out of reach for me. You can see my scopes on my roof here to get an idea: https://www.astrobin.com/qk4bgt/ |
|
0.00
#... |
|---|
|
well I think I might have figured out my problem it wasn't actually light pollution it was the fact that my focal lenght is only 300mm. I realized tonight after trying like 4-5 times and failing just to get an image. Well, I cheched saturn and I couldn't even see the rings but instead the whole thing was made up of like 50 pixels which isn't enough for anything based on the sizes of other things. So, I guess this brings me to ask what is the minimum for photographing at least saturn and its rings? also what is a good price range I should be looking at to get something that actually works like isn't just a piece of garbage? I have a nikon d90 if that might help get a better price range guess. |
11.07
#... |
|---|
well I think I might have figured out my problem it wasn't actually light pollution it was the fact that my focal lenght is only 300mm. I realized tonight after trying like 4-5 times and failing just to get an image. Well, I cheched saturn and I couldn't even see the rings but instead the whole thing was made up of like 50 pixels which isn't enough for anything based on the sizes of other things. So, I guess this brings me to ask what is the minimum for photographing at least saturn and its rings?also what is a good price range I should be looking at to get something that actually works like isn't just a piece of garbage? I have a nikon d90 if that might help get a better price range guess. I shot for a couple of years from a Bortle 7 suburban backyard. The best solution for that site was a moderately widefield scope with a mono-camera. I used 660mm at the time and could shoot some broadband and the narrowband was excellent. DSLRs will be much more difficult. |
2.94
#... |
|---|
| I am under Bortle 8 sky, and i am planning to shoot NB and RGB targets, but i am still waiting to complete my equipment fully or more so i don't suffer much, then later i can show many people about imaging under light pollution skies, i saw many did great already, so i can join to that later too and have more results from LP location. |
1.81
#... |
|---|
| I live in a Bortle 5 zone West of the Meridian, and Bortle 4 zone East of the Meridian. I mainly image from my backyard with a single street light (non-LED) about 50 feet in front of where I image from. I shoot all short to long focal lengths, both narrow and broad bands. |
0.00
#... |
|---|
I was in a Bortle 6 zone when I moved in to my current house. Unfortunately, I am now under Bortle 7 skies and nothing other than narrowband is a waste of time except if your target is the moon. In my opinion, RGB might be a realistic option under Bortle 5 or lower since my second location benefits from Bortle 4 skies and it is a notorious difference. No, you just have to learn shielding and processing tricks and spend -a lot- more time on exposure. I’m in Bortle 8 (17.8 mag/arc-sec2). I shoot pretty much everything, including very faint stuff. I’ve given up on a few targets that are primarily dust and reflection, but not many. https://www.pbase.com/dsantiago |
0.00
#... |
|---|
|
Hello. I'm bortle 6. I have some light pollution and sometimes if the object is under 30° is difficult to imaging. And the light pollution limits my exposure time... but I can do astrophotography from home. I use a optolong Lpro and Lenhance filter. You can see my results... Clear skies ;) |
0.00
#... |
|---|
| Bortle 6 here |
0.90
#... |
|---|
I am unfortunately bortle 8 and don't have any light pollution filters yet so do struggle with light pollution in my images. Hoping to get optolong l-pro soon to help  |
|
2.94
#... |
|---|
|
Let's make it longer topic or keep it alive and active. Should i give in my Bortle 7/8/9 sky for LRGB? If i don't shoot long exposure then it is a waste? What gain will you use under Bortle 8/9 with NB filters and with LRGB filters? mainly people use Unity gain of both, now what other gain you use other than unity gain for both filters? Does the location of the target in the sky also playing a factor? Means if it is higher it will be better imaging and less LP affected than if it is lower? How much difference you all can see if you use a mono + RGB only vs. OSC [we are talking about astro cooled cameras here]? Because i don't want to waste time with mono and RGB while i can get that RGB good enough by one camera OSC and add it to L or Ha from mono, what do you think? Now the main important question, how do you know your Bortle sky without using a LP site or LP meter measuring device? Good luck |
7.33
#... |
|---|
|
Hi, I am under a bortle 8 sky. To the west a few kilometers away I have a shopping mall that has a HUGE outdoor screen for advertising, it literally burns the sky. i have a poor quality skywatcher LP filter which has helped but struggle heavily with LP in my images. I have to take a lot of subs to increase SNR. I think this is interesting as I am about to purchase a new filter and I am always checking for gear combos (OSC cameras) do I can get a feel for what works dependent on the object, LP, etc. Clear skies |
|
7.33
#... |
|---|
| Does anyone know if the Baader neodymium moon and sky glow filter is any good? |
