when i take video of a planet, any planet, i am unable to get any decent detail, and the atmosphere appears to have devastating effects on the view of the planet (i.e. instead of looking round it distorts significantly and looks like a deflated balloon, only around 70% of the object stays consistently lit up) this means that the best i can do in any video is just make out the 2 main bands in jupiter, make out the rings and just the cassini division in saturn and discern no detail on mars. i know that i should expect atmosphere issues but this just seems crazy. here is what i am doing,
hooking my GSO 254 f4 newt up with a 1.25" 5X teleview powermate. attaching the qhy 5l-ii camera to it and focussing, i also check with an eye piece to make sure it is all good. i then look at ezyplanetary and reduce the sliders until i can make out as much detail as possible.
i did find that the powermate needed an extender which i have added. i have collimated with the extender attached to the focusser. I feel the issue is either
1) the collimation is an issue, whenever i test it i need to make adjustments, including adjusting the secondary mirror which makes me think something is up there
2) something to do with the light path when i add all the elements up means that it is not hitting the sensor dead on
3) maybe a 1.25" barlow is no good for these applications
4) the gods just don't like being shot by me
this is very frustrating so any help will be appreciated. i have also attached the images i took of saturn and Jupiter (stacked in registax)
Sorry to hear the troubles you are having.
To me, the sample pics you have included simply look noisy.
How many frames are stacked in those images?
I assume you are using video mode and stacking an avi?
Can you provide more details on length of video or number of shots?
yeah, they are a little noisy because that is the only way i could get any detail from the images, by sharpening the heck out of it. i am recording in avi, around 600 frames and then stacking the best 200 or so. i cant upload the videos but they really show the extent of the issue, the planet looks like an electron cloud. i have been trying to trial a few things today in the day to see if i can trouble shoot the issue, it looks like the majority of the issues arise when i attach the camera, it is just difficult to resolve details. i have seen others on this forum with the exact same set up (same camera, scope and powermate) and they seem to get some decent shots.
If the planets look sharp in your eyepiece then I doubt there is a collimation error, although an f4 has a very small sweet spot.
I would stack a lot more frames than 200.
600 frame videos would only be around 10 seconds of footage.
What were the conditions like when you took the data?
Seeing conditions will greatly impact your results.
I'll let someone else chime in here and offer you some advice, I have not had a lot of experience in this area.
What frame rate are you getting from the camera? Try and tweak settings to get 60fps, if not already.
As mentioned, you need many more frames, and then stack a smaller percentage (i.e. relatively higher quality). At that focal length, you should be able to get several thousand frames of each - maybe 2mins on Jupiter (7200) or 5 mins on Saturn (18000).
Don't be afraid to experiment with stacking and processing (wavelets in Registax, etc.).
The "distortions" you mention when watching the raw video/feed are normal - that's why we stack!
They do look very noisy Aidan, which leads me to think if whether your actually saving the correct Stacked Out-Put Image in processing, or if they are stacking correctly, , tho your images are looking a little/lot like single frames to me ? I could be wrong, but could be an avenue to think along if havent already ? ?
Also, processing planet images is a little challenging by any means, but that amount of noise just shouldnt be there even with only 200 subs in my opinion ?
I still have a very old dated LPI Imager, slow and only capable of only a few frames per second, so, i used to only grab 50 - 100 frames and when stacked, they looked much smoother than these , can you show us a single frame also ?
Cheers ...
I really don't mean to hijack your thread, but I have exactly the same problem, whether I use one of my two webcams or my 1100D. I generally take about 2500 frames and use about 500-600 of them. Saturn has lovely sharp edges, but almost no detail whatsoever. Jupiter ditto. Wavelets adjustments sharpen the edges, but do nothing at all for detail.
Sorry, I'll go now.
raymo
Last edited by raymo; 20-04-2014 at 12:52 PM.
Reason: more info
yes, these are the stacked images, you should see them before stacking ... I have experimented with some set up and got it a bit sharper, i have been tinkering with every set up option i can think of and i have it to a position where i think the only remaining issue is that i am not able to get the camera sensor to prime focus (because it needs a small extender) i have one coming in the mail so we will see how that turns out. i will also have a go at stacking a lot more images. Thanks for the help, i will post the results
Aidan,
Your set-up sounds pretty standard, but could you explain-
""i did find that the powermate needed an extender""
The focusing of the powermate is almost independent of the back focus...there should be no need for an extender.
Can you upload an image of your arrangement....
The extender i am talking about is between the powermate and the telescope, not related to the back focus.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Merlin66
Aidan,
Your set-up sounds pretty standard, but could you explain-
""i did find that the powermate needed an extender""
The focusing of the powermate is almost independent of the back focus...there should be no need for an extender.
Can you upload an image of your arrangement....
so last night i took this picture, and i think i have found the biggest issue. the qhy5l ii needs to be placed just back of the furthest point that it can reach, i need an extender on the qhy5 to get it perfect. it was missing in the original box (as per my previous thread) and it is being sent out now. this should mean that i get to prime focus a lot better. fingers crossed for a really sharp image.
For the life of me i can not figure this out. I have tried collimating over and over, ensured that i have the appropriate back focus to the camera, messed around with all kinds of settings for the camera itself and still i cant figure it out.
Bad seeing ?
From my Ob the eliptic goes over a hill ( small volcano acually - extinct btw) to my north. Which also has housing up the slopes and I know my planetary work is badly affected by the heat plumes and low latitude I work at. My videos look very much like yours even though I stack 1-2000 frames. I get occaisonal nights where the cold clear southerly gives me better results but I very rarely get enough definition to distinguish anything more than Jupiters bands at best.
My issue is that it doesn't look like atmosphere alone. if it were atmosphere then i would expect it to go in and out of focus but there should be some frames of clarity. over the last week i have been trying to image saturn and i am yet to get a frame that is clear, the edges of the rings are fuzzy along with the edges of the planet itself. i can get the object sharper after stacking but because the video is so poor, the stacking will never reveal any clear detail, such as the C ring, a defined Cassini division,etc. I have run out of ideas, the only thing i can think of is that one piece of equipment in the light path is flawed in some way.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ZeroID
Bad seeing ?
From my Ob the eliptic goes over a hill ( small volcano acually - extinct btw) to my north. Which also has housing up the slopes and I know my planetary work is badly affected by the heat plumes and low latitude I work at. My videos look very much like yours even though I stack 1-2000 frames. I get occaisonal nights where the cold clear southerly gives me better results but I very rarely get enough definition to distinguish anything more than Jupiters bands at best.
talking with the Bintel guys, trying out all manner of fixes and driving myself insane, i am fairly certain that this is a collimation issue. i use a laser collimator and it seems to collimate fine, however. when i get mars into the center of the eyepiece (with powermate attached) i get a very similar issue to what i described in my original post, only it is not as obvious because the eyepiece is bigger than the sensor. i also notice that 2 dots come together as i focus but never perfectly align. with my limited knowledge i think these relate to collimation, can anyone confirm?
if so, how do i resolve this, is there a better, more accurate way of collimating than a laser? i did notice that as i turn my laser in the eyepiece holder that it does make a small circle around the collimation point in the mirror (and about the same size too) but i don't think this is a big enough issue to be causing what i am seeing ...
Perhaps describe your entire collimation process? The laser is really only useful as a final tweak. Do you use a cheshire or other method? Also remember that f4 is going to very sensitive to small collimation errors.
Aidan
I only posted a very quick reply last night so I will do a bit more today. The thing with lasers is that they should be regarded as only part of the collimation process. With my scopes when I check my collimation each night I usually just use a laser but I regularly do a complete process from scratch , usually at the start of each new moon observing period.
A good guide to collimation without a laser is here. http://www.astro-baby.com/collimatio...on%20guide.htm
If you read this you will see that the time you would use a laser is about step 3. The other thing to remember is that the laser itself must be collimated, and from your description of the spot moving around it very well may not be. Rotating the laser in the focuser may not be accurate as the fit may not be perfect anyway. Rotating it on a v block and shining it on a wall is the best way.
