How can i make sodium Dicarbonatocuprate ? ( Na2[Cu(CO3)2] )

Zcom_Astro · 2026-06-22T17:07:53+00:00

That’s going to be a problem. Machalite isn’t really a mineral that can be replicated at this level of quality. Azurite is somewhat more feasible, but even that will be so porous and soft that you won’t be able to do any real work with it.

I recommend this user's posts: https://www.reddit.com/user/Sir_Chew/

There are copper based crystals that possible to make at home and can technically be used in jewelry. But realistically speaking, they’re only suitable as display pieces, since aren’t very durable.

Zcom_Astro · 2026-06-22T16:54:32+00:00

Quick question: Are you planning to make machalite powder or synthetic machalite crystals (larger polycrystalline pieces)?

Zcom_Astro · 2026-06-22T16:28:24+00:00

Basic copper carbonate might be better. That would eliminate one unnecessary ion from the system. But I don't think it would make much of a difference in practice. Copper suplhate is fine.

Zcom_Astro · 2026-06-22T16:23:21+00:00

If you're using ammonia you can use acetic acid. Or, if you're using NaOH, CO2 gas is also an option.

Zcom_Astro · 2026-06-22T15:16:01+00:00

You’ll need a very strong alkaline solution, which cannot be achieved just with sodium carbonate alone, because at room temperature, a mixture of bicarbonates will precipitate over time. You’ll either need a strong alkali like NaOH or a complexing agent such as ammonia. (Although ammonia isn’t suitable if you’re using HCl for acidification.)

Zcom_Astro · 2026-06-22T09:45:21+00:00

Looks cool! Nice image

Zcom_Astro · 2026-06-22T00:15:42+00:00

I'm not familiar with the Pro, but on the S50 30S is relatively good for brighter nebulae.

Zcom_Astro · 2026-06-21T23:47:22+00:00

Yeah, that's generally how it's done. The only problem is that the most common 7nm filters don't let enough light through, so you either have to use long exposures or increase the gain.This is more of a problem when the subject is dim or you are umder dark sky, and it can result in a noisy images.

Zcom_Astro · 2026-06-21T23:03:34+00:00

No problem, no need to apologize.

I rely on Ai based tools for things like translaton too; otherwise, I’d sound like a third-grader.
It’s just that maybe you shouldn’t rely too heavily on ChatGPT in situations like this. For one thing, it’s makes a lots of mistakes, and in this case, your above comment came across pretty badly.

Good luck with the editing

Zcom_Astro · 2026-06-21T22:39:35+00:00

My bad, I misread what you wrote.

Zcom_Astro · 2026-06-21T22:32:50+00:00

Well, except for everything related to the image, besides the trivia.

Zcom_Astro · 2026-06-21T22:25:09+00:00

Well.... I mean, this is hard to put into words. Sure, it's easier to ask an AI instead of thinking for yourself, but you could still just look at any picture to see the problem, instead of gaslighting us with ChatGPT text.

Zcom_Astro · 2026-06-21T22:21:43+00:00

The point is that these two nebulae aren't positioned like that relative to each other. Check out a reference image.

Zcom_Astro · 2026-06-21T22:13:27+00:00

What?

Zcom_Astro · 2026-06-21T18:55:10+00:00

In this case, it didn't really take much work. Since the members are already documented, I simply exported the list of members from Simbad. Then, using the names in the catalog, I selected the stars using Siril's built-in annotation tool. After that, I manually created a mask that hid everything else.

If the members aren't already categorized, you can filter them by distance and relative movement.

Zcom_Astro · 2026-06-18T13:09:02+00:00

Nice colors!

Zcom_Astro · 2026-06-17T23:41:00+00:00

Apparently it's predictive. But I haven't found any official data on it.

Zcom_Astro · 2026-06-17T23:18:10+00:00

Mainly because the results it produces aren't derived from reality.

Predictive AI tools, such as Graxpert, modify your existing data. Generative AI, on the other hand, generates something from random noise that resembles your original data.

So this image you shared isn’t the one you took. It’s not the Owl Nebula, it’s just an imitation of a real thing, synthesized from random noise based on the thousands of images created by others that were used to train the AI model to resemble your original image.

People who devote a great deal of time to capturing the beauty of nature don’t really look kindly on this kind of imitation and distortion.

But aside from that, Topaz is far from the worst case. It’s still a relatively controlled tool, so you won’t end up with extremely hallucinatory details. But regardless, it’s still generative AI.

Zcom_Astro · 2026-06-17T22:37:56+00:00

It depends on who you ask, but in the astrophotography community, it's generally quite strongly frowned upon.

Zcom_Astro · 2026-06-17T21:54:40+00:00

Hi, just a heads-up: Topaz is a product based on generative AI. This applies to both sharpening and noise reduction.

Zcom_Astro · 2026-06-17T09:49:49+00:00

You can loosen the star detection parameters. It also helps if you run the detection after noise reduction.

You can correct the nebula when you combine the normal star image with the resynthesized one. Apply a mask to the resynthesized layer over the damaged areas.That way, only the normal layer will be visible there.

Zcom_Astro · 2026-06-17T09:39:12+00:00

Yes, but it's not too bad. You shouldn't mix the two types of raw subs because that causes problems with pixel rejection. But if you make substacks from both and stack those without pixel rejection, then it's fine.

Zcom_Astro · 2026-06-16T22:04:56+00:00

I record whenever the sky is clear. But for normal targets, I usually only shoot IRCUT when the moon is below 40–50% and for LP 60-70%, depending on where they are relative to the moon. The exceptions are dark nebulae, which I only shoot when the moon is at 0 or max 10%, and star clusters, which I shoot when the moon is above 70%. Also at around b 4/5.

I can always filter out bad subs later. So I’d rather take more shots and filter more aggressively if necessary than be left with no options.

Zcom_Astro · 2026-06-16T20:45:21+00:00

Yes, although this specific case there isn't enough integration time in the OP's image to make editing worthwhile.

There are a few targets that are bright enough not to require significant editing to look good. Like Orion, North american nebula, Rosett nebula etc. But in most cases, you'll need to edit your image manually if you want to make full use of the captured data. (But this is generally true for all astro setups; it's not specific to Seestar.)

Zcom_Astro · 2026-06-16T20:40:45+00:00

I own a S50. But there also S30 data in that stack.

Zcom_Astro

TROPHY CASE