Saturn - well, sort of

[Screwdriverone]

Hi,

Here are some pics I took last night of Saturn, not too happy with them, but at least they came out.

Stacked 256 frames using registax on each, 1st one was flipped horizontal and vertical as I think that is how it should really look? I dunno...:shrug:

I am still trying to get these bigger, but as I zoom right in optically, the image almost fades to black in the screen. Any ideas? I was using the ED12.5mm with the 2.5x Barlow at 200x and these were taken at 2x optical camera zoom. Still too small for my liking even after I have doubled the size of the original before cropping.

Thanks anyway for stopping by for a look. :)

Chris

[Kokatha man]

Great to get images out, even if you're self-conscious about the amount of experience and thus level you're at right now, eh Chris?

I for one know just how short a time you've been in the game, and it doesn't need a seer to predict that given a few months (and some good seeing nights!) that you'll be putting out images that you won't feel the need to deprecate over at all!

Practise/experience is what it's all about with just about anything; that and receiving good, positive feedback and advice; and whilst I'll ruffle a few feathers with this comment (so what, that's what people expect of me!) your level of experience and achievements don't require any great extrapolation to approach the levels of those of some so-called high achievers; whose images often seem somewhat blurry to me, and not worthy of some of the praise directed at them, even with something as photogenic as Jupiter.

Keep it up, and on this subject; wouldn't it be good to see a section devoted to learners that affords understanding of "learning the ropes" and invites positive, rather than "compare it to mine" comments; and actual constructive, sensitive encouragement. Something not buried in the more advanced, hi-tech and issues/equipment postings that often seem to dominate the imaging sections of the forum.

This is not a knock on people in general on IIS, Mike in particular is a good example of someone helpfull and encouraging: but I would like to see some of the people who seem to be regarded as "good" imagers being a bit more ready to offer/respond to help requests; and more assisting of "newbies."

This particular "bake" is in response to someone confiding in me that they feel that it's hard when starting out to find the confidence to post images: members will no doubt be aware that I don't find any problems myself with "putting it to people" re requesting information, not backwards about being forward as my old uncle used to say.

Whilst some may choose to see it otherwise; this is intended to be an entirely constructive posting. Which, on reflection and fairness to people; really is to suggest that it's easy to overlook other people's needs for assistance - most of us received help to get us where we are, wherever that be - and it's too easy to be bound up in our own endeavours and not be responsive to the "learners."

Cheers, Darryl.

[Screwdriverone]

Thanks Darryl,

You are right, one of the reasons I post some of my images is because, even with the limited equipment that I have, ie no Laptop or Prime focus camera, (just a digital camera on a plastic afocal adapter), I think that these are quite good and am looking for some comments on whether they are as good as I can expect from what I have.

I have posted a number of envious responses to some member's astonishing shots of planets and nebulae showing details that I dont think I can ever aspire to without some additional serious monetary investment, but one reason I am sticking at it is because it is so satisfying to get some positive feedback on shots that were bloody hard to get and took a lot of time to set up.

Also, taking photos that show a bit of detail is one way I can show my family things I look at as they are a bit non-plussed when it comes to stargazing and a good photo can record some of the sights I experience out in the cold while they watch Family Guy or Desperate Housewives in the warm house! :sadeyes:

The main reason I post some "confidence lacking" emotions in my posts is because the actual picture I see throught the eyepiece is much better than the one captured in the digital camera and therefore I am a bit confused as to what it is I might be doing wrong and that is where the dissatisfaction comes in.

Thanks for the encouragement, I appreciate the comments and it helps maintain the momentum and interest in something that I find quite astounding everytime I go out the backyard and have a look.

Cheers

Chris

[Kokatha man]

Thank you too Chris - I'm one of these funny fellas that can't just "do" things; I've got to have a bit of an understanding of what I'm doing before and as I go along - it makes it a bit more (sometimes a lot more) difficult but it's much more worthwhile in the end: I'm sorta saying I've got to really understand "why" as I'm doing things to really get a handle on them.

Looked at your images again and could definitely discern one of the surface belts on Saturn: verified by it being quite clearly noticeable in each of the "flipped" images - no Cassini yet, but I'm sure it's coming!

I'm slowly moving towards imaging; I have a definite project with a modded DSLR and wide angle lens (not using a scope) to take various exposures and do some stacking; hoping even to justify the costs of getting the equipment - but in the meantime I'm thinking I've got one of these Pansonic mini-dvd recorders and maybe I should have a go at your methods.

Pity I didn't take the one with the Leica lens and not let my sister have that one (my very old man went a bit funny and bought 2 of them: he used to be a camera man and got it into his head to get them whilst his brain was in neutral, and we couldn't return them afterwards.)

How was the focussing - I guess it was difficult with the camera's screen: might sound silly but would throwing a dark cloth over your head like those old-time photographers help image brightness/contrast on the screen for focussing purposes?

Maybe using a shorter fl ep might be worth a trial too? Smaller image but increased brightness trade off could have some benefits? Now that I'm typing this post I can't recall whether you listed the exposure times?

Think I'll go in, get the camera and rummage in my shed for something to make an adaptor out of.....

Cheers, Darryl.

[Kokatha man]

That was meant to read "what about a longer fl ep" for that brighter image.....

[iceman]

Nothing wrong with them, Chris. Certainly recognisable as Saturn, much more recognisable than my first attempts :)

What scope was it taken with and is it EQ driven?

[Screwdriverone]

Darryl,

Yes, the shorter FL comment caught me out a bit, however, the smallest one I have is the 10mm wide angle and the 10mm original plossl that came with the scope. These only give me 250x with the 2.5x barlow which is sorta kinda pushing it for fair seeing on my scope.

The eyepiece that rarely leaves the scope is the 12.5mm ED one I bought as it has astounding contrast and FOV compared to ALL the others I have, so this one is running at 200x with the Barlow.

I will have to try the 12.5, 15 and 20mm again with different combinations and camera positions/zooms as I have found that the closer I get, I sort of get a tunnel effect (cant remember what this is called) when I zoom in with the camera.

I have also noticed that at 2x optical zoom on the camera I get a really bright clear and in focus image (although smaller) but the camera cant pick up too many details at this range/size. The moment I zoom in a little more, the image starts to fade out, even though it gets bigger, and almost disappears from view on the camera's LCD screen. I think I am at the limit of the scope/camera when this happens (Sheeny called it Dawes Limit and Raleigh Limit).

The best view in the eyepiece shows me (barely) the Cassini division, but it is very hard to get focused properly through the EP first, then mount the camera, refocus (due to the extra weight of the camera changing the rack and pinion focuser slightly) and the image in the LCD screen of the camera is fairly small for camera focussing after the fitting of the adapter.

I will try out the method of infinity focus on the camera as I found out how to do this the other day after Sheeny's post elsewhere pointed me in this direction and then fine tune with the scope once mounted.

One thing that might help is a crayford 10:1 focuser? I find it very hard to get really good focus using the standard one, so perhaps I should contemplate saving up my piggy bank to get one?

Mike, thanks for the comments, the scope is the Skywatcher 5 inch newtonian with RA motor drive listed in my signature and the eyepiece was 12.5mm ED with 2,5x Barlow. The Pentax 7MP digital camera captured the shots and I processed 256 frames of 640x480 AVI stacked with registax using your method from the articles section and sharpened in Gimp2. I didnt feel the need to split the RGB channels as it was a quick and dirty run and my previous attempts / results didnt warrant the extra time on it.

I appreciate the input from all who stop by to look at my photos. Even with all the self deprecating comments I make, it is still pretty cool to be able to do this myself. :)

Chris

[iceman]

Ok enough of this afocal stuff.

Get yourself a ToUcam and use the barlow to image at prime focus. It'll be heaps easier and you'll get better results.

[Screwdriverone]

Umm, Mike, I would love to get a ToUCam but there is a problem with this:

1) I dont have a laptop
2) I need to spend more money.
3) See 2.

I thought this may be the case, however, I am going to spend a little more time at the scope with what I have and see how I go. The advice has put me on the right path now and as you can see from my ever growing signature contents, I need to keep the chequebook locked in a dark cupboard for a long time yet...:P

Chris

[Gendo]

Hi Chris,

I started out the same way you have with similar results. P&S digicams and DSLRs just aren't sensitive enough to get larger image scales with planets, but I do think you could get sharper results at your current scale when seeing conditions permit. If you are simply holding the camera to the eyepiece, you may want to look into whether you can attach your camera to the eyepiece with a digi-t ring and a t-thread adaptor for you camera. Without the vibrations of your hands, the image will turn out sharper.

At some point, a laptop (or spare desktop PC you can take outside) with a Philips webcam is the way to go. Doesn't even have to be an expensive laptop (mine's 7 years old) to work with USB or firewire cameras (and it works just fine with my DMK21 firewire camera). Really just needs to be about 600Mhz or faster processor in it with 128MB+ ram. I think used laptops like that are pretty cheap these days.

Money is one of the main obstacles to this hobby. If you pursue it, you'll have spent about $4,000+ on equipment by the time you're 3 years into it like I have.

[Screwdriverone]

Hi Justin,

I use an Afocal camera adapter that fits over the eyepiece and clamps down on it to hold it steady, I also use a 10 sec shutter delay timer on AVI and stills to stop the wobbles that happen when I press the button down.

I seriously think that my scope needs collimation as the conditions last night were great but even my ED 12.5mm EP had some ghosting when looking at Saturn at 80x and with the other EP's there was a noticeable trail to one side that looked like TV interference from a building reflection on an analog TV.

I know that I can throw more money at it, but I think I will continue to screw the most out of this setup until I get some serious cash together to buy another bigger scope with all the bells and whistles. Look out for thousand page posts then when I am ready to select the next beast! :scared:

Thanks for the input.

Chris

[Garyh]

Great effort Chris, by the time you can upgrade to a toucam and a laptop you will be a expert!
Shouldn`t cost too much, my toucam was from ebay at $80 and the pc I am using at the scope would cost less than $500..
should give you a good image scale at 1000mm with a good 3x barlow or a powermate..
cheers and keep at it, most of all its fun hey!
Gary

[Gendo]

Chris, it may have just been the seeing at the time. Didn't look much better than your images through my C11 last night. I calculated the seeing as 2/5 at the best.

I would collimate on the star Regulus since its right there next to Saturn.