Go Back   IceInSpace > Images > Solar System

Reply
 
Thread Tools Rate Thread
  #1  
Old 08-05-2006, 10:13 AM
allan gould's Avatar
allan gould
Registered User

allan gould is offline
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Brisbane
Posts: 4,485
Difference between 8" and 10" with Jupiter

Was doing some avi reductions of Jupiter taken on 5 and 6 May with my 8" and 10". What became apparent is the difference in image size between the two scopes. The images have been processed the same but differences in seeing give some overall differences. What may be of interest is the image scaleand what was noticable to me is the amount of light gathered between the 8 to 10" scopes.
Regards, Allan
Attached Thumbnails
Click for full-size image (CAP0009.jpg)
1.9 KB76 views
Click for full-size image (CAP0013.jpg)
4.3 KB86 views
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 08-05-2006, 10:26 AM
[1ponders]'s Avatar
[1ponders] (Paul)
Retired, damn no pension

[1ponders] is offline
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Obi Obi, Qld
Posts: 18,778
Aperture and FL. Don't you just love the combination

Just wait til you have 640X480 happening
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 08-05-2006, 10:51 AM
astroron's Avatar
astroron (Ron)
Supernova Searcher

astroron is offline
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Cambroon Queensland Australia
Posts: 9,326
I had a look at Jupiter through a visitors ED80 and was amazed at the difference from the 40cm, I had not looked at Jupiter through a small scope for quite a long time
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 08-05-2006, 11:32 AM
allan gould's Avatar
allan gould
Registered User

allan gould is offline
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Brisbane
Posts: 4,485
Quote:
Originally Posted by [1ponders]
Aperture and FL. Don't you just love the combination

Just wait til you have 640X480 happening
Tried it at 640x480 and the frames were a mess with interference lines across them. Must be some thing with the QC3000 and low light levels [or my laptop], so it looks as if I'm stuck at 320x240.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 08-05-2006, 12:51 PM
[1ponders]'s Avatar
[1ponders] (Paul)
Retired, damn no pension

[1ponders] is offline
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Obi Obi, Qld
Posts: 18,778
Quote:
Originally Posted by allan gould
Tried it at 640x480 and the frames were a mess with interference lines across them. Must be some thing with the QC3000 and low light levels [or my laptop], so it looks as if I'm stuck at 320x240.

What frame rates and exposure levels are you using Allan?
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 08-05-2006, 01:52 PM
allan gould's Avatar
allan gould
Registered User

allan gould is offline
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Brisbane
Posts: 4,485
Frame rates

I'm using 1/10 sec exposure, 5fps, ~50 % gain, 50-60% brightness and 320x240 resolution
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 08-05-2006, 08:23 PM
Skylark
Registered User

Skylark is offline
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 2
Allan, now you know why people get aperture fever!!! I will post some examples from the 20 inch once the weather clears up..
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 08-05-2006, 08:36 PM
[1ponders]'s Avatar
[1ponders] (Paul)
Retired, damn no pension

[1ponders] is offline
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Obi Obi, Qld
Posts: 18,778
Quote:
Originally Posted by allan gould
I'm using 1/10 sec exposure, 5fps, ~50 % gain, 50-60% brightness and 320x240 resolution
Ok I thought it might be your frame rate, but not by the look of it. I get "interference" lines if I up the frame rate too far, but I'm talking 25+ fps
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 09-05-2006, 09:02 AM
allan gould's Avatar
allan gould
Registered User

allan gould is offline
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Brisbane
Posts: 4,485
Quote:
Originally Posted by Skylark
Allan, now you know why people get aperture fever!!! I will post some examples from the 20 inch once the weather clears up..
Had a look at Orion nebula through a 22" dob with a beautiful mirror a few months back. It was sublime.......and etched into my memory. Want one, can't afford one, look through others. As far as the 640x480 issue for webcam capture , I'm now convinced its a limitation with the camera or its software. Have a look at the camera Damian Peach uses ($2000). I wonder if its something to do with the long exposure mods done to the camera lowers the frame rate that it can work at? Anyway I'll have to learn to work within its limitations.
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 09-05-2006, 09:06 AM
iceman's Avatar
iceman (Mike)
Sir Post a Lot!

iceman is offline
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Gosford, NSW, Australia
Posts: 36,799
What software are you using for capture, Allan?
Reply With Quote
  #11  
Old 09-05-2006, 09:41 AM
allan gould's Avatar
allan gould
Registered User

allan gould is offline
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Brisbane
Posts: 4,485
I'm using software written by Colin Bownes called Vega ver1.2.1. Excellent program with all the bells and whistles.
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 09-05-2006, 10:00 AM
iceman's Avatar
iceman (Mike)
Sir Post a Lot!

iceman is offline
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Gosford, NSW, Australia
Posts: 36,799
Have you tried alternate software (ie: k3ccdtools) to see if it helps the dropping frames problem?
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 09-05-2006, 11:04 AM
allan gould's Avatar
allan gould
Registered User

allan gould is offline
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Brisbane
Posts: 4,485
Same with other software; as I said maybe the fact that I'm using a modded webcam for imaging may have something to do with it.
Allan
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 04:54 AM.

Powered by vBulletin Version 3.8.7 | Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Advertisement
Bintel
Advertisement