Go Back   IceInSpace > Images > Solar System

Reply
 
Thread Tools Rate Thread
  #1  
Old 25-09-2020, 01:25 PM
multiweb's Avatar
multiweb (Marc)
ze frogginator

multiweb is offline
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Hinchinbrook
Posts: 19,649
Mars from the 15th

That's my only go at Mars with the OSC so far. Just a very quick run of 4000 frames in average seeing. The detail is not crash hot but it was a good test to check the settings for the camera. Looking forward to do some more later on with the mono and some filters this time. Also have a faster more sensitive camera in the mail so that can only improve the result.
Attached Thumbnails
Click for full-size image (Mars_230348.jpg)
20.5 KB154 views
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 25-09-2020, 03:41 PM
Anth10's Avatar
Anth10 (Anthony M)
When its late stay awake

Anth10 is offline
 
Join Date: Jan 2016
Location: Briar Hill
Posts: 463
Good to see Marc you've got yourself set. May I ask what cam are you splurging on? I'm sort of looking at a planetary camera and currently using my zwo asi 290 mini as a test. I think I'll go for a dedicated colour camera though. Till now and will continue with my canon 60D mod with eyepiece projection.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 25-09-2020, 05:39 PM
multiweb's Avatar
multiweb (Marc)
ze frogginator

multiweb is offline
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Hinchinbrook
Posts: 19,649
Good day Anthony, I shot that with a 120MC-S. I have a 462MC coming soon hopefully that's a lot more sensitive in the IR wavelengths. Something I like to imagr for deep sky as well.
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 26-09-2020, 07:46 PM
Troy's Avatar
Troy
Mars 2010

Troy is offline
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Hunter Valley
Posts: 943
Good image Marc.
You will notice a big difference when the new camera turns up looking forward to the images.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 27-09-2020, 09:42 AM
multiweb's Avatar
multiweb (Marc)
ze frogginator

multiweb is offline
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Hinchinbrook
Posts: 19,649
Quote:
Originally Posted by Troy View Post
Good image Marc.
You will notice a big difference when the new camera turns up looking forward to the images.
Yes I can't wait to try again at bettet resolution and faster frame rate.
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 27-09-2020, 03:29 PM
Quopaz (Nick)
Registered User

Quopaz is offline
 
Join Date: Jan 2020
Location: South Australia
Posts: 218
Still a pretty good Mars, hope you can improve on it with the new camera.
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 28-09-2020, 06:37 PM
multiweb's Avatar
multiweb (Marc)
ze frogginator

multiweb is offline
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Hinchinbrook
Posts: 19,649
Quote:
Originally Posted by Quopaz View Post
Still a pretty good Mars, hope you can improve on it with the new camera.
I have high hope
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 03-10-2020, 08:41 AM
multiweb's Avatar
multiweb (Marc)
ze frogginator

multiweb is offline
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Hinchinbrook
Posts: 19,649
Well the camera is certainly a lot quicker. I was able to get 240fps in SER 8bit at gain 200. Did a few test at 16bit as well. It was pretty close to the moon so I'm sure the colors are not correct and I'll have to work out the balance. I kept the histogram in the 70/80% ball park to avoid white clipping. The files are huge though (~13GB for 3minutes @ 640x480 ROI) . I filled up my 240GB SSD 3 times so I have a capture storage issue now. I might get another SSD and rotate one downloading to the PC while the other is imaging. I have a few somewhere but I can't remember where I've put them. I'm getting better with focus because of the high frame rate. Seeing was at times "wow" and others "wtf" looking at the loop so I'm sure I'll find some crisp ones in there somewhere. I might have to cut the SER in shorter bits like 3x1min and process and derotate accordingly. I'm sure some of the data is pretty good. I just have to dig it out now. Here's a quick stack of one of the last loops. I also did plenty on Jupiter and Saturn early in the night.
Attached Thumbnails
Click for full-size image (2020-10-02-1252.jpg)
62.6 KB32 views
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 03-10-2020, 08:47 AM
Anth10's Avatar
Anth10 (Anthony M)
When its late stay awake

Anth10 is offline
 
Join Date: Jan 2016
Location: Briar Hill
Posts: 463
Very promising indeed Marc - I'm sure you will sort out the storage issue but on the bright side the data is there to work with and you will refine the process with more attempts. Yes seeing does play havoc with planetary imaging - it's hit and miss most of the time so I guess the more you're out there the better the chances of capturing that perfect shot.
This image has decent detail showing through even with the moon washing out the sky with its glow. Was this taken at prime focus or did you have a barlow introduced in the image train?
Good start.

Anth
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 03-10-2020, 08:54 AM
multiweb's Avatar
multiweb (Marc)
ze frogginator

multiweb is offline
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Hinchinbrook
Posts: 19,649
Quote:
Originally Posted by Anth10 View Post
Very promising indeed Marc - I'm sure you will sort out the storage issue but on the bright side the data is there to work with and you will refine the process with more attempts. Yes seeing does play havoc with planetary imaging - it's hit and miss most of the time so I guess the more you're out there the better the chances of capturing that perfect shot.
This image has decent detail showing through even with the moon washing out the sky with its glow. Was this taken at prime focus or did you have a barlow introduced in the image train?
Good start.

Anth
Thanks Tony. That's at prime focus yes and I think I'm a little over x3 with a Baader FFC. I'll work out the exact image scale with the spacing I had but I reckon a bit over 8m FL is a good estimate. I focused initially on a moon of Jupiter and I realised my collimation is a tad out so another thing to look at as well. I'm wondering if the detail is not smeared by rotation as well. I don't know at this stage until I play with the data. There's tones of it on 3 separate drives. I filled up every hole I could find on my work machine.
Reply With Quote
  #11  
Old 03-10-2020, 09:05 AM
Tulloch's Avatar
Tulloch (Andrew)
Registered User

Tulloch is offline
 
Join Date: Sep 2019
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 261
Quote:
Originally Posted by multiweb View Post
Well the camera is certainly a lot quicker. I was able to get 240fps in SER 8bit at gain 200. Did a few test at 16bit as well. It was pretty close to the moon so I'm sure the colors are not correct and I'll have to work out the balance. I kept the histogram in the 70/80% ball park to avoid white clipping. The files are huge though (~13GB for 3minutes @ 640x480 ROI) . I filled up my 240GB SSD 3 times so I have a capture storage issue now. I might get another SSD and rotate one downloading to the PC while the other is imaging. I have a few somewhere but I can't remember where I've put them. I'm getting better with focus because of the high frame rate. Seeing was at times "wow" and others "wtf" looking at the loop so I'm sure I'll find some crisp ones in there somewhere. I might have to cut the SER in shorter bits like 3x1min and process and derotate accordingly. I'm sure some of the data is pretty good. I just have to dig it out now. Here's a quick stack of one of the last loops. I also did plenty on Jupiter and Saturn early in the night.
Hi Marc, good to see the new camera working out for you, the jetstream is massive at the moment which might be affecting your results (at least it did mine when I tried 2 nights ago). You may have mentioned this before, but why are you capturing so much black space? 640x480 is way too high for Mars (I use 220x220 on my barlowed 9.25"), that will affect your file size. I assume you are capturing the unbayered footage (not RGB) so your filesize isn't 3x the size it needs to be. No need to capture at 16 bit, all you are capturing is more noise and increasing file size. I don't understand your comment about derotating 3x1min ser files, Mars rotates so slowly you could probably capture for 10 minutes and not have a program with planetary rotation.
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 03-10-2020, 02:07 PM
multiweb's Avatar
multiweb (Marc)
ze frogginator

multiweb is offline
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Hinchinbrook
Posts: 19,649
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tulloch View Post
Hi Marc, good to see the new camera working out for you, the jetstream is massive at the moment which might be affecting your results (at least it did mine when I tried 2 nights ago).
Hi Andrew, yes so far pretty happy with it. Got to get used to the new settings though re: gain and exposure. It was clear and by the look of it next few days might be overcast so I went for it regardless. Plus it's the long week-end. I can sleep in

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tulloch View Post
You may have mentioned this before, but why are you capturing so much black space? 640x480 is way too high for Mars (I use 220x220 on my barlowed 9.25"), that will affect your file size.
Yeah I know. I though it was pretty tight though. I used Sharpcap this time and one of the standard FOVs from the dropdown. I have to learn how to set up my custom FOVs like in FireCapture. And I think I might have moved the camera a little further too so the magnification is bigger now. Pixel size may be different to. Not sure. I need to check all this. Lots of testing that night. The mount also had the new motors and the RA extension installed, new polar scope reticule as well. I kind of juggled a few things rushing to get some data quickly that night.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tulloch View Post
I assume you are capturing the unbayered footage (not RGB) so your filesize isn't 3x the size it needs to be. No need to capture at 16 bit, all you are capturing is more noise and increasing file size.
Good question. Short answer I have no idea. I'll check. Good point on the file size. But for sure SER is raw and always mono right?
Same size whether it has a bayer pattern or straight LUM.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tulloch View Post
I don't understand your comment about derotating 3x1min ser files, Mars rotates so slowly you could probably capture for 10 minutes and not have a program with planetary rotation.
I was worried that at that magnification 3min would be enough to smear fine details so instead of stacking 3min of video maybe stack 3x1min then combine the 3 masters in WinJUPOS and derotate but if you say so 10min is heaps. I've got so many frames to chose from now. That particular SER was ~14GB 640x480 @ 251fps and 45325 frames total.
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 03-10-2020, 02:49 PM
Tulloch's Avatar
Tulloch (Andrew)
Registered User

Tulloch is offline
 
Join Date: Sep 2019
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 261
Quote:
Originally Posted by multiweb View Post
Hi Andrew, yes so far pretty happy with it. Got to get used to the new settings though re: gain and exposure. It was clear and by the look of it next few days might be overcast so I went for it regardless. Plus it's the long week-end. I can sleep in

And I think I might have moved the camera a little further too so the magnification is bigger now. Pixel size may be different to. Not sure. I need to check all this. Lots of testing that night.
Yep, the pixel size on the 462 is 2.9 microns, up from the 3.75 microns you were using before on the 120. Optimal focal ratio is now f/15, you may need to check your barlow

Quote:
Originally Posted by multiweb View Post
Good question. Short answer I have no idea. I'll check. Good point on the file size. But for sure SER is raw and always mono right?
Same size whether it has a bayer pattern or straight LUM.
SER can be either 8 bit or 16 bit and can be either rgb (debayerd) or raw8 (undebayered). When you load it into AS!3, does it autodetect rgb (debayered) or rggb (undebyered)? If it's rgb then the file size is 3x larger than it should be.

Quote:
Originally Posted by multiweb View Post
I was worried that at that magnification 3min would be enough to smear fine details so instead of stacking 3min of video maybe stack 3x1min then combine the 3 masters in WinJUPOS and derotate but if you say so 10min is heaps. I've got so many frames to chose from now. That particular SER was ~14GB 640x480 @ 251fps and 45325 frames total.
I normally image Jupiter for 3 minutes and it's larger and rotates every 9 hours. Mars is smaller and rotates every 24, so you should be able to image for 3x longer on Mars. AS!3 does an amazing job, much better than the older Registax for removing planetary rotation (see link below).
https://www.planetary-astronomy-and-...-time-jupiter/
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 03-10-2020, 02:57 PM
multiweb's Avatar
multiweb (Marc)
ze frogginator

multiweb is offline
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Hinchinbrook
Posts: 19,649
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tulloch View Post
Yep, the pixel size on the 462 is 2.9 microns, up from the 3.75 microns you were using before on the 120. Optimal focal ratio is now f/15, you may need to check your barlow
Will do.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Tulloch View Post
SER can be either 8 bit or 16 bit and can be either rgb (debayerd) or raw8 (undebayered). When you load it into AS!3, does it autodetect rgb (debayered) or rggb (undebyered)? If it's rgb then the file size is 3x larger than it should be.
Here's the file header
Quote:
Filename: F:\CN-212\2020-10-02\Mars\2020-10-02-1252_3_.ser
Filesize: 13937412722 bytes

Header Details:
* FileId: LUCAM-RECORDER
* LuID: 4660
* ColorID: 8 (RGGB)
* LittleEndian: 0
* ImageWidth: 640
* ImageHeight: 480
* PixelDepth: 8
* FrameCount: 45368
* Observer: Observer
* Instrument: ZWO ASI462MC
* Telescope: telescope
* DateTime: 02/10/2020 22:50:53.316709 (0x8d867259de157f7)
* DateTime_UTC: 02/10/2020 12:50:53.316709 (0x8d866d1cc3547f7)

Timestamps:
* Timestamps are all in order
* Min timestamp: 02/10/2020 12:50:53.315731 UT
* Max timestamp: 02/10/2020 12:53:53.559308 UT
* Min to Max timestamp difference: 3 min 0.243576 s
* Average frames per second: 251.698

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tulloch View Post

I normally image Jupiter for 3 minutes and it's larger and rotates every 9 hours. Mars is smaller and rotates every 24, so you should be able to image for 3x longer on Mars. AS!3 does an amazing job, much better than the older Registax for removing planetary rotation (see link below).
https://www.planetary-astronomy-and-...-time-jupiter/
I should be alright then with 3min. Those files take over 5min with AS!3 on my machine to do the quality estimation run alone.
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 03-10-2020, 03:53 PM
multiweb's Avatar
multiweb (Marc)
ze frogginator

multiweb is offline
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Hinchinbrook
Posts: 19,649
Here's Jupiter. I've updated the colors. I find that with this cam I really need to push the saturation. Not sure if it's because its QE is still very high in higher wavelengths but if I auto level the histogram I end up with a monochrome picture with RG and B almost all at the same levels.

Added Saturn. Pretty poor details. Maybe seeing. Will check other vids. Colors seem alright though.

Quote:
Filename: F:\CN-212\2020-10-02\Jupiter\2020-10-02-1051_6_.ser
Filesize: 19889445922 bytes

Header Details:
* FileId: LUCAM-RECORDER
* LuID: 4660
* ColorID: 8 (RGGB)
* LittleEndian: 0
* ImageWidth: 800
* ImageHeight: 600
* PixelDepth: 16
* FrameCount: 20718
* Observer: Observer
* Instrument: ZWO ASI462MC
* Telescope: telescope
* DateTime: 02/10/2020 20:50:08.082637 (0x8d86714bf625c07)
* DateTime_UTC: 02/10/2020 10:50:08.082637 (0x8d866c0edb64c07)

Timestamps:
* Timestamps are all in order
* Min timestamp: 02/10/2020 10:50:08.079519 UT
* Max timestamp: 02/10/2020 10:53:08.096749 UT
* Min to Max timestamp difference: 3 min 0.017229 s
* Average frames per second: 115.083
Attached Thumbnails
Click for full-size image (2020-10-02-1051_Jup.jpg)
102.3 KB26 views
Click for full-size image (2020-10-02-1104_Sat.jpg)
62.7 KB23 views

Last edited by multiweb; 03-10-2020 at 05:03 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old 03-10-2020, 03:56 PM
Tulloch's Avatar
Tulloch (Andrew)
Registered User

Tulloch is offline
 
Join Date: Sep 2019
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 261
Thanks, I'm not familiar with the log file on SharpCap, but the fact that it says the colorID is RGGB looks promising.

Don't forget that you can reduce the stack’s size in AS!3 using the "Image Size" sliders in the Frame View (where it also shows the bayer information). No point wasting time stacking black space either

Last edited by Tulloch; 03-10-2020 at 06:09 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 03-10-2020, 04:02 PM
multiweb's Avatar
multiweb (Marc)
ze frogginator

multiweb is offline
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Hinchinbrook
Posts: 19,649
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tulloch View Post
Thanks, I'm not familiar with the log file on SharpCap, but the fact that it says the colorID is RGGB looks promising.
Good to know.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tulloch View Post
Don't forget that you can reduce the stackes size in AS!3 using the "Image Size" sliders in the Frame View (where it also shows the bayer information). No point wasting time stacking black space either
Oh is that what it's for then. Will do from now on.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT +10. The time is now 03:35 PM.

Powered by vBulletin Version 3.8.7 | Copyright ©2000 - 2020, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Advertisement
NexDome Observatories
Advertisement
Testar
Advertisement
Limpet Controller
Advertisement
Bintel
Advertisement
Astronomy and Electronics Centre
Advertisement