Life is a learning experience.
Stated out by going to Wa*-**art and stopping in the one hour booth. When I
asked the teenage girl with multiple body piercings just on her face ( I
hate to think of the other places she might have "Body Art" ) if she could
develop these rolls without cutting the negatives she gave me a blank look..
I left immediately. ( Sorry for the commentary on the personal hygene of the
photo girl but it left an impression on me ).
I went to Eck***s and found a young man behind the counter that got excited
when I told him I was taking pictures of astonomical things. He said it
would be no problem to roll the film and he would make sure that the
background was black. I left my 2 rolls with him. A few hours later I
returned to get the prints. The film was rolled in about a 3 inch dia. roll
in a seperate package.
The prints were nice and black in the background but they were pretty bad.
The moon was a washed out blob of white with no detail what so ever. The
piggyback shots were good in that you could see the stars nicely but the sky
fog was overwhelming. The couple of shots that were afocal were more like
chicken scratches than star images.. the hand guiding will need some serious
work.
In looking over the negatives I found.
The moon was nicely exposed with detail and color.. will take them to the
pro shop Monday.
There was a 5 inch scratch that covered almost 3 images.. was it from the
rolling or the squeege ?
The piggyback image of M41 had some nice color that didn't show in the
print. Another for the pro shop.

How do I get rid of the skyglow ?

James

View index by [date] [author] [subject]
Previous message: [M]: Recomputing Planet Positions, Howard C. Anderson
Next message: [M]: Correction to photo post, James Holbrook
Next message in thread: [M]: RE: Follow up on Photo Processing, Don Tabbutt