> DARKEST SKY IN EUROPE
This is the beginning of my research on how dark the sky could be and what is benefit of a dark sky for astrophotography. I was inspired from those 2 sites. First one presents mathematical model of how dark the sky is. Orange is for very polluted sky, for yellow – you do not see the milky way, for green – sky is polluted of some degree up to the zenith, for blue – there is a shining at the horizon and grey is for a dark sky. The second map is for how much light each village emit. You can switch between the years.
I went to Kara Tepe at the heart of the Rhodope mountains 1600m above the sea level. It is in the grey area and the sky was outstanding. You can get great shots with ease. Full if stars and details.
I will continue my research and use such locations to shoot faint objects. Here are some new photos of Lagoon nebula (40x30s ISO 25600) and M22 cluster (1x30s ISO 25600):
Satellites, cosmic trash or UFOs, the moving spots are everywhere on the sky. Typical satellite behavior is to reflect sun light. It should be yellow or white and could fade and shine due to its rotation.
If you have used DeepSky stacker to stack RAW files, maybe you have notice that the resulting image is poor of color saturation. This is because it has a higher number of bits then the display could show.
Last test from passed night put an end of the questions witch is better CCD or CMOS. My old CCD K-m fall back compared to CMOS K-5.
HDR stands from High Dynamic Range. In short it is the number of tones that compose the image. The larger it is, the best capability we have to see details in the bright and dark regions of a scene.
Witch is better. Stack or long exposure? It depends…