Log in

View Full Version here: : Equipment and techniques for high-res planetary imaging


bird
09-11-2005, 02:50 PM
I know a few people are interested in understanding how to get high detail in their planetary images so I thought it worth starting a thread to discuss.

High-res Planetary Imaging is all about the weakest link. Whatever the weakest link in your setup is, thats going to determine the result because most of the time the weakest link is far and away worse than the other parts of the system. Improving is all about identifying and then slowly controlling or eliminating these factors:

1. collimation and optics
2. thermal control and equilibrium
3. tracking and alignment
4. image acquisition
5. processing

There are things that we can't control (i.e. seeing) but for the rest we have to try and do the best we can so that on nights of good seeing we can take the most advantage.

1. Collimation and Optics
------------------------------

There's plenty of info around about how to collimate almost any type of scope. Don't underestimate it's importance - see this link:

http://www.astrosurf.com/legault/collim.html

Buy yourself a decent set of collimation tools, and make sure the centre spot on your primary (assuming a reflector!) has a nice hole in the middle. The Jim Fly collimation tools are very nice, that's what I use, but there are other ones around.

You need the following as a minimum:

- Cheshire / sight tube
- Laser
- 2x barlow
- Jim Fly reflective centre spot (red triangle, much easier to see than white or black).

If you have a 2" focusser then I highly recommend that you also get the Jim Fly 2" BlackCat and 2" AutoCollimator, just makes life so much easier.

Learn to use the barlowed laser approach to align the primary - this is really nice and is not affected by errors in the secondary or focusser. Then you can use the autocollimator to align the secondary in isolation.

One of the biggest problems to overcome in collimation is to learn how to adjust each of these things accurately, and not get confused by secondary errors throwing out the alignment of the primary and vice versa.

2. Thermal Control and equilibrium
-----------------------------------------

There is another thread around here that talks about measuring the temperature of the mirror and tube. Something like that is needed so that you know what sort of situation you are in. If you're lucky enough to live somewhere with very stable temps than you might be ok, but if you live somewhere with big day/night swings (like me) then you're in trouble.

Tube material also plays a big part in this, as is discussed in the "To Dew or not to dew" thread in this forum. I can reccommend using unpainted aluminium as about the best thermal material. I have my tubes made by Gary Mitchell in Sydney, he's an astronomer who happens to run an aluminium workshop and he does great work.

Only try to get the best images when you know that everything is in thermal equilibrium, otherwise you'll be killed by the tube currents or boundary layer effects. If you build the temperature logger and a cooling unit (described elsewhere) then you can take some control of this, but otherwise you have to limit your imaging to parts of the night when nature has done the work for you - most likely between 2am and sunrise.

Set the scope up outside at sunset and leave it there to equalise. I do this even if I am not going to start imaging until 4am.

3. Tracking and alignment
-------------------------------

I know that Mike The Iceman has done some great work on imaging without tracking, but there are limits to how much detail you can see like this. There is still a lot of motion blur as the image moves through the FOV, and also the tube and mount will still be ringing from the nudges that you give them for several seconds.

To get a serious jump in image quality requires that the scope be tracking so that the target sits in the FOV for at least a couple of minutes. It doesn't have to be perfect, and it can be wandering around a little - that doesn't matter too much as long as you can leave it alone for at least a minute or two before it comes close to one edge. It only takes a rough and ready polar alignment to get this close.

Not only is this good for imaging, but it lets you do a much better job of focussing and judging the seeing. Also lets you use a higher magnification than otherwise.

4. Image Acquisition
-------------------------

Save your images in the highest resolution format available. Avoid saving the images as jpeg or other compressed formats because you're immediately throwing away some of the high res data.

Just keep saying to yourself, "disks are cheap" as all your gigabytes vanish...

ToUCam users:

When the seeing is poor you'll find that higher framerates will give you more good frames and less blur, and when the seeing is good you'll find that lower framerates give you higher quality images. This comes to trial and error and lots of practice.

Firewire Users:

Always capture at the highest framerate you can and store the data in a lossless format. Firewire is either 400 or 800 mbit, fast enough for potentially 100 fps with no image compresion and 16 bit resolution per pixel.

Colour v Monochrome + filters:

You will always get a better result if you use a monochrome camera + filterwheel and RGB filters, no question about it. BUT it's not really worth making the investment until you feel that you're already getting good results with the colour camera. If you're getting "good" images and want to make a step up in quality then it's time to check out one of the firewire cameras from places like www.theimagingsource.com or www.ptgrey.com.

I would recommend against usb2 cameras, as they are very finicky and most of the units on sale at present are MS Windows only. Firewire has a serious advantage that all firewire cams stick to a published specification that lets them work with a range of both free and commercial software, on all platforms. This also makes them future proof.

5. Processing

Processing is all about information, knowing when to preserve information and knowing when you can afford to lose it. In general try to keep all the raw data in a lossless format, and always store your intermediate results from Registax or Astra Image in a high precision format like 48 bit TIFF. Store your final result in the same high precision 48 bit TIFF format and make a JPEG copy to post onto the web.

Try lots of different processing steps, it sometimes helps to have Registax, Astra Image etc all open at the same time so you can go back and forwards between them to try different things.

Processing is a really large topic...

Lets get some discussions going about this stuff... I'd love to see a whole bunch of aussies producing great images!

Bird

Robert_T
09-11-2005, 03:06 PM
Bird,

Many thanks for putting this together - excellent stuff. Need to digest and may add afew comments later.

cheers,

iceman
09-11-2005, 03:13 PM
Wow Anthony, that's fantastic and this will have to go up as a how-to article on the main site.

What you've written above, with appropriate links and pictures will make the basis of a great article.

And you're right, anything we (all) can do to improve the standard of planetary imaging in Australia is a good thing!

The standard of planetary and deep-space imaging in Australia simply as a direct result of people sharing knowledge has already improved by a huge amount over the past year, let's keep it going.

Exfso
09-11-2005, 04:09 PM
Thanks Bird, excellent stuff. For info I have an Orange Micro Ibot Firewire webcam, dont seem to be able to get it going properly though. They look like a ping pong ball on steroids. It appears as though they have gone down the gurglar though.

rumples riot
09-11-2005, 04:37 PM
Great tips and commentary Anthony.

Hard to contribute to a fairly comprehensive article. However, I just want to add something from a SCT users perspective. There are not many of us here so, it won't matter to many of you.

As you know collimation is one thing that I concentrate on the most. Collimation in SCT's is extremely critical. The reason for this is that given the secondary acting as a 5x multipler large errors in collimation become visible with just a slight misalignment of the secondary to the primary. Collimation should be performed ideally on nights of excellent seeing for an SCT. However, this is rare in my neck of the woods and have resorted to buying a Pico Star (artifical star). This star is mandatory as a collimation tool for SCT owners who want to do hi re planetary imaging and get good results. It can be performed everytime you image and therefore your scope will always have perfect collimation. PS while SCT's hold collimation well, minor deviations can occur just from differing temps. These tiny amounts affect final images significantly.

Another issue for SCT owners is the dreaded tube currents. Cooling of an SCT will take much longer that other systems. The reason being is two fold. The tubes are generally very large and hold a lot of air and the system is closed. This make it take longer for the mirror and tube to adjust to ambient temp. There are several ways around this issue, but two that I know are permanently mounting the scope outside and forced induction of air into the tube using an SCT cooler. The former is the method I use with my scope permanently house outside on a pier. It is properly protected with several layers of protection from heat and water. Using this method the scope is ready for work 1 hour after sunset. If I housed the scope inside, it would take up to 3 hours before the scope was ready for work.

Anyway that is my immediate imput. Great topic.

bird
09-11-2005, 05:27 PM
Paul, I agree totally. SCT's probably present the most challenge for planetary imaging.

Bird

bird
09-11-2005, 09:42 PM
I've added a page on my website that shows the dramatic effects of thermal instability. I've used the Monday night temperature and image data from the Snake Valley camp at Ballarat.

http://www.acquerra.com.au/astro/cooling/ballarat/

Bird

ballaratdragons
09-11-2005, 09:51 PM
Bird,

I will be reading this thread very carefully as it develops. I have learnt a bit more from what I have read already.

Thank you for sharing your knowledge to help us! Much appreciated.

davidpretorius
09-11-2005, 11:04 PM
Brilliant!

Robert_T
09-11-2005, 11:08 PM
Hi Bird, I think you've certainly covered off the major areas or issues that are important in realising the best planetary images. I'd particularly like to see the 1st issue of Optics and Collimation expanded upon, delving into the relative importance of optical quality, optical configuration and design (eg. newtonians versus cassegrains, focal ratio, obstructions, flocking etc) and the use and quality of accessories such as barlows (is the advantage of powermates as important with web-cam imaging etc) and extension tubes to best effect (eg. in relation to pixel size of the camera).

Is there a best rig or rigs for planetary imaging? Are there for example significant/substantial advantages in a longer focal length newtonian (F6-7) over the more common F5s by virtue of enhanced contrast from smaller obstruction and larger image scale, or is this really a small thing compared with the quality of the optics, especially where the image scale can be provided by a large amplification barlow/power-mate. On the subject of power-mates are they really much better in planetary imaging than standard barlows when its really only the very centre of the lens is used (the edge being an area of weakness for barlows). This one makes sense to me, but then I've never imaged with a powermate to compare.

The issue of filters for different situations and used in different combinations is also very interesting. Beyond RGB I have seen some very striking images taken through near infra-red and some of the best colour images when near infraread is substituted for red in RGB combos. I read also that some imagers in areas with typically poor seeing routinely image in only red and green and combine.

Anyway, great thread, and look forward to reading more of peoples thoughts - and hopefully adding to them - as they develop.

cheers,

RB
10-11-2005, 02:02 AM
Thank you Bird.

Essential reading for everyone that's into imaging.

Robert_T
10-11-2005, 07:22 AM
Just wondered, has anyone given any thought to an IIS planetary imaging workshop? Can't think of a better way to share and boost the overall skill level in our community. Wouldn't even need everyone in the same place as it's the sort of thing that could be done over Webex or similar system.

Thoughts?

gbeal
10-11-2005, 07:56 AM
Cracker article Bird, and coming from you it is obvious that you know what you are on about.
As Rumples said, with such a comprehensive article, not much else can be added.
One thing I did wonder with Rumples and his artifical star, if you collimate in the horizontal position, does this change much/at all when you go vertical?
An imaging workshop IS beneficial, and one was run mid this year, with another planned next year (In NZ).
Gary

bird
10-11-2005, 08:44 AM
Hi guys, thanks for the positive response to the post.

Gary and others - from my perspective the most important thing of all is to "know your equipment", i.e. know how well your scope holds collimation, know how well your scope cools by itself or with the help of a cooler, etc.

e.g. I know that my scope won't hold it's collimation from one side of teh sky to the other so I'm pretty sure that I would not be able to use an artificial star. The collimation would be ok when the tube was horizontal and then drift way outa whack when I was pointed up. I work around this by collimating with the scope pointed roughly at the part of the sky where I will be imaging and then leaving it sit there with the drives off (and cooling on) until I'm ready to start imaging.

But then all your scopes will be different to mine, so the question is - do *you* know how well your scope holds its collimation?

regards, Bird

xrekcor
10-11-2005, 08:58 AM
You of included something about the LPI, regardless it's still a popular and worthy camera

regards,CS

bird
10-11-2005, 09:12 AM
G'day Rob - I've never seen a LPI, so I can't really say much about them. I used a ToUcam for a while and I'd guess that they are similar. You can get quite good results with a colour video cam, so I'd be more worried about collimation and thermal issues first before considering replacing it.

On the other hand, one of the regular planetary imagers on CloudyNights (Chris Go in Cebu, Philippines) has just replaced his ToUcam with a monochrome firewire cam + filters and he's now jumping with excitement about the increase in image quality that he's getting... so it's definitely something to consider when you get to that point.

Bird

xrekcor
10-11-2005, 09:21 AM
Hey Bird,

It's cool dewd, just looking for a bite lol. btw, I did ferget to mention that is
a great article, and I agree with Mike should put it in the "How To" section.
And maybe include some pic's

regards,CS

iceman
10-11-2005, 04:09 PM
I've asked Bird, and he's agreed, to give a talk on hi-res planetary imaging at the IceInSpace Astrofest at Lostock in January 2006.

Should be a great learning experience.

Combine that, with the how-to article that will eventuate out of this thread, and we'll be on our way to improving the standard of everyone's lunar/planetary images.

davidpretorius
10-11-2005, 04:20 PM
how much do dave and bird get paid to do their public speaking circuits.

Bill Clinton, Greg Norman, Jack Nicklaus, Bird & Mr Tuc!!!

davidpretorius
10-11-2005, 04:23 PM
Actually, i am going to invite him down to the east coast of tasmania with ocean views, dark (no lights whatsoever) skys and crayfish for the month of January.

bird
10-11-2005, 04:35 PM
Spent all of Feb in tassie last year, also went there on our honeymoon in '92. A good friend of mine from school lives down that way in Burnie.

Bird

rumples riot
10-11-2005, 05:27 PM
Gary, I have noticed little or no difference in collimation from the horizontal to the imagined object with regard to collimation. This I suppose is particular to SCT's which are less susceptible to issues relating to flexure of the tube. The shorter tube has its benefits in this regard. That said collimation should not be undertaken when the scope is in direct sunlight. The tube currents will destroy the likelyhood of getting good collimation with the day star.

bird
10-11-2005, 06:14 PM
Good info Paul, I know almost nothing about SCT's so it's good to hear from people that own them..

Bird

robin
17-11-2005, 04:41 PM
Great stuff Bird. The issue Im facing is focussing.Finding it difficult to get a real nice focus thing going but i guess at the end of the day, the seeing will determine much of that.

asimov
24-11-2005, 06:06 AM
Hi bird.

Very nice article. "get to know your equipment" is one rule I try to live by. I'm a compulsive star test collimator & I will check collimation {& tweak if necessary} on every new object I look at. {this includes my refractor} If I'm looking at a planet I will goto the nearest star, check collimation & move back to the planet. One gadget I've found invaluable in star test collimation in ordinary-bad seeing conditions is an aperture mask {not to be confused with a hartmann} a 1 holed aperture mask, the hole being round.

I can't explain scientifically but it seems to add more contrast to the diffraction rings seen & hence their a lot easier to see. You have less time to workout which screw to turn....which way to turn....turn, then get back to the eyepiece & start over though, which COULD lead to the 'kicking the crap outa the OTA' scenerio if one's not very patient.

Well done & great to read your thoughts on a few issues.

bird
24-11-2005, 08:16 AM
Hi Asi, an aperture mask is a good thing to have as you say. Thats one area where smaller scopes have an advantage, they perform better in bad seeing and also the diffration rings around stars are easier to see for collimation.

Bird