Loading…
10
Serious question, I compared stacking 50 vs 200 frames for the Orion Nebula
I finally got a clear night last week and decided to test something. I shot the Orion Nebula with my 6-inch scope and dedicated camera. For the first set, I stacked 50 light frames. It was okay, you could see the shape and some color. Then I stacked 200 frames from the same session. The difference wasn't just a little better, it was huge. The noise in the background sky was almost gone, and the faint outer gas clouds popped out with way more detail. I spent maybe an extra hour capturing those frames, but the processing was so much easier because the signal was cleaner. I used the same dark and flat frames for both stacks, so the only real variable was the number of lights. Has anyone else hit a point where more frames just made everything click? I'm curious if there's a sweet spot for different targets.
3 comments
Log in to join the discussion
Log In3 Comments
john_dixon617mo ago
Yeah, I had that exact thing happen with the Andromeda galaxy. Stacked 80 frames and it was a noisy mess, then pushed it to 250 and the whole spiral arm structure just snapped into view. The extra integration time really does smooth out the background like nothing else.
4
sam5307mo ago
But is it really worth the extra time? Seems like a lot of work for a bit more detail.
7
ruby_grant6mo ago
Honestly depends on your goals, @sam530. If you're just sharing online, the extra hours might not matter much. But chasing that perfect shot can turn into a real time sink lol.
2