>How to do Asteroid screening
While cleaning up my PC I found sequences of shots of Virgo galaxy cluster taken during springs of the last 2 years. Those were attempts to shot this object, but I was not satisfied with the result and left them. Having shots with the same equipment from long period of time are valuable as you can check for any changes in the filed that might lead to a discovery. So I do. I got all of them and stack. Since recently I am using algorithm in DeepSkyStacker that do not clear the movements on the shots. It is Entropy Weighed Averege.
After did the stack of about 112 frames of 30s, I saw something that is very similar to the behavior of asteroid. It was present only on the shots from 9th of April 2018. Using Stelarium, I estimated the coordinates of the object and the approximate brittleness of 16 by compare it to the nearby stars. I asked for help in order to recognise the object in the Bulgarian astro forum forum.starrydreams.com, as I am not an expert in asteroid tracking and the shots were taken more then year ago. They show me the Minor Planet Checker site and the asteroid was mached to (1558) Jarnefelt with is 65 km of diameter. It is typical to observer asteroids beyond Mars orbit near the ecliptic. Here is one example at Astrobin. By cpmparing the stacked result with a single shot, what also amaze is how much data you can retrieve from the noisy background of the 14bit RAW file. Each faint spot is a galaxy that is only visible in the stacked image and only few fotons have been recorded at a single frame. The setup is as usual: Pentax k5, 112x30s, ISO 12800, SkyWatcher 200pds.
So here are the shots:
1. Single frame crop:
2. Stack 112x30s crop. The trace is not a solid line as the stack algoritm have excluded some bad frames.
3. Final image:
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…