<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	
	>
<channel>
	<title>
	Comments for Allan&#039;s Astrophotography Stuff	</title>
	<atom:link href="https://allans-stuff.com/comments/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>https://allans-stuff.com</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 19 Nov 2025 13:38:40 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>
	hourly	</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>
	1	</sy:updateFrequency>
	
	<item>
		<title>
		Comment on M42 The Orion Nebula, revisited by Dimitri Dobrenko		</title>
		<link>https://allans-stuff.com/2011/12/20/m42-the-orion-nebula-revisited/#comment-31124</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Dimitri Dobrenko]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 19 Nov 2025 13:38:40 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.allans-stuff.com/2012/08/04/m42-the-orion-nebula-revisited/#comment-31124</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[Hi
I&#039;m new in the business. Ijust shot m42 using: samsung S21 ultra with 25mm Eyepiece on celestron 4se (4&quot;, 1325 mm focus), alt-az tracking (technical reasons), no filter, in 8-9 Bortle area. I&#039;ve shot 210 lights, 30 darks and 30 biases with 4sec and 3200 ISO.
Next I stacked in Siril and streched in Graxpert. Only 13 out of 210 lights were stacked due to poor conditions. I write you because my m42 image is very like your original image- same &quot;seahorse&quot; and ngc 1977 on the left.
You wrote about second image:
&quot;In this one image are stacks of 5 second, 10 second, 15 seconds, 30 seconds, 45 seconds, 60 seconds, 120 seconds and finally 180 seconds images. Each stack is then combined using HDR Efex pro to create the composite and then stretched in Photoshop. That’s 90 lights, 20 darks and 20 bias&quot;. So there are 8 sets of lights, but only 20 darks and biases.
As far as I understand each set has to be with its own sets of calibration frames. And why you didn&#039;t shot flats?
Please advise
Thank you in advance
Dimitri]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hi<br />
I&#8217;m new in the business. Ijust shot m42 using: samsung S21 ultra with 25mm Eyepiece on celestron 4se (4&#8243;, 1325 mm focus), alt-az tracking (technical reasons), no filter, in 8-9 Bortle area. I&#8217;ve shot 210 lights, 30 darks and 30 biases with 4sec and 3200 ISO.<br />
Next I stacked in Siril and streched in Graxpert. Only 13 out of 210 lights were stacked due to poor conditions. I write you because my m42 image is very like your original image- same &#8220;seahorse&#8221; and ngc 1977 on the left.<br />
You wrote about second image:<br />
&#8220;In this one image are stacks of 5 second, 10 second, 15 seconds, 30 seconds, 45 seconds, 60 seconds, 120 seconds and finally 180 seconds images. Each stack is then combined using HDR Efex pro to create the composite and then stretched in Photoshop. That’s 90 lights, 20 darks and 20 bias&#8221;. So there are 8 sets of lights, but only 20 darks and biases.<br />
As far as I understand each set has to be with its own sets of calibration frames. And why you didn&#8217;t shot flats?<br />
Please advise<br />
Thank you in advance<br />
Dimitri</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		Comment on How much do dark skies really matter? by Spherical Mirror vs Parabolic Mirror in a Reflector Telescope, Which is Better? - Astronomy Online		</title>
		<link>https://allans-stuff.com/2016/06/07/much-dark-skies-really-matter/#comment-31123</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Spherical Mirror vs Parabolic Mirror in a Reflector Telescope, Which is Better? - Astronomy Online]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 30 Mar 2025 21:52:37 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://www.allans-stuff.com/?p=1615#comment-31123</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[[&#8230;] Your choice of locations is also far more important than your mirror. Someone with a spherical mirror out in a designated dark sky site will have infinitely better views than someone within a hundred miles of a large city who has a parabolic mirror. Read about that in this interesting article Do dark skies really matter. [&#8230;]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[&#8230;] Your choice of locations is also far more important than your mirror. Someone with a spherical mirror out in a designated dark sky site will have infinitely better views than someone within a hundred miles of a large city who has a parabolic mirror. Read about that in this interesting article Do dark skies really matter. [&#8230;]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		Comment on Astrophotography image storage and backup by Craig Knowlton		</title>
		<link>https://allans-stuff.com/2018/06/02/astrophotography-image/#comment-486</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Craig Knowlton]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 28 Sep 2020 23:13:13 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://allans-stuff.com/?p=2707#comment-486</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[good overview...do you use a spreadsheet or software for cataloging your photos?]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>good overview&#8230;do you use a spreadsheet or software for cataloging your photos?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		Comment on Full well capacity and why does it matter? by Lindsay		</title>
		<link>https://allans-stuff.com/2016/01/16/full-well-capacity-matter/#comment-485</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Lindsay]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 31 Aug 2020 11:36:49 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://www.allans-stuff.com/?p=1582#comment-485</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[Really well explained thankyou from a newbie]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Really well explained thankyou from a newbie</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		Comment on iOptron SmartStar E R80 budget goto by Robert Powers		</title>
		<link>https://allans-stuff.com/2013/03/09/ioptron-smartstar-e-r80-budget-goto/#comment-484</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Robert Powers]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 09 Aug 2020 21:30:47 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://www.allans-stuff.com/wp/?p=222#comment-484</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[Thanks. I have an older Celestron 100 love the planets but it’s much larger and heavier. I was thinking of getting a  better grab and go solution. And I have a friend who wants to get started. Found this scope helping her look and your YouTube looking for reviews. Now I’m going to buy your book. I’m I missing the link?  

Awesome honest review. 

Rob]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Thanks. I have an older Celestron 100 love the planets but it’s much larger and heavier. I was thinking of getting a  better grab and go solution. And I have a friend who wants to get started. Found this scope helping her look and your YouTube looking for reviews. Now I’m going to buy your book. I’m I missing the link?  </p>
<p>Awesome honest review. </p>
<p>Rob</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
