what kind i do with this photo? (besides throw it way- LOL) after seeing some images here i feel thats all it worth- i went crazy processing it and cant get it any better- can you tell me what all the problems are?- this is 400 frames stacked in regiscrap out of '400 frames'- i messed that up to- i used a 9.25/2X barlow/ir filter/ and 2 max ent deconvolutions in the trial astra image- im seriously missing out on something here- maybe the scope needs collimated? thx john
John,
having been in a similar position myself lately, can I suggest you make the AVI available for processing. Mike took one or two of mine, and turned them into miracles. I am not suggesting Mike processes everyones images (or maybe I am) but it lets you know whether or not it is capture or procerssing, or whatever.
I am not suggesting Mike processes everyones images
Good!
As Gary said, when I look at an avi it can help me suggest what might be wrong, whether it's capture settings, focus, seeing, or whether it's in the processing.
here we go- i used the neximage webcam (ToUcam CCD chip) 2X antares elite barlow and the baader uv/ir filter-- the capture was with Amcap- they all seem about the same to me
brightness-50%
gamma----0---
10/fps at 40 seconds
saturation---around 80%
shutter speed-- i forget but this is what a single frame AVI looked like
processed in regiscrap with the histostrech off- i did 2 runs through it, liitle histo strech at the end but didnt overdo the wavelengths- when i do that i get a 'smeared image'- i didnt get that so its other problems
took it into CS2 and fooled with just about everything ( im not to swift here)- then most likely went crazy with the high pass actions i got- im not sure what to do now, i 'think' im focused ok- this is actually one of my better jups- they all look about the same, they all seem to lack that 'natural' look- john-- single untouched avi frame below
What was the gain setting?
Why did you only capture for 40 seconds? You should be capturing for 2 minutes and therefore give yourself many more frames to choose from. Try stacking less (like, 100-150) for a start and see how that looks.
Maybe you can attach a raw stacked image after registax stacking (before wavelets).
will do, ill post it tormorrow- reason im stuck with 400 frames- is anything over that--- i have run regis as long as 16 hours!!!- i forget to add- i try and keep the gain between 40-60, really, i use this along with the shutter speed to adjust the image brightnes on the screen- i really have real settings on these 2
16 hours for running Registax! And I thought my laptop was slow. What sort of machine are you processing on?
Keep your shutter speed at 1/25 or 1/33, your brightness about 50%, gain around 30-50%, gamma 80-100% and adjust your gain to improve the brightness. Make sure your laptop screen is at full brightness too if you are not using a histogram to judge your light level.
Use the attached image as an example. It's probably a bit bright but it helps beat the onion rings
Yes and no, those are the settings I started using a couple of weeks ago as a base line for the scopes I've been using, and I've been slowly modifying them to get no rings but not blow out the colour balance. I've found high gain and gamma make it very difficult to get a smooth image and good colour. To my eye anyway. I've also noticed a considerable difference between different scopes.
Those settings are pretty close to what I've been using for my 8" (I've actually dropped my gamma down now to around 40% and put my gain to around 50-60%), but the for C11 I use at times, I find I need quite different settings.
It also depends on how much magnification I'm using. If I'm prime focus, I have to drop the gain and gamma right down. As I ramp the mag up I have found I need to ramp the gain up and slowly increase the gamma. If I have the image magnified to cover around 400 pixels (diameter) then the gain is up around 90%. Btw unless the seeing is worth it I stick to 10fps.
The first two images were both taken on my 8" the darker one does have a slight onion ring but I much prefer the colour and the smoothness of the image, 40% gain. The lighter one I've had great trouble getting the colour right and getting rid of the grain, it was taken at 60% gain (settings saved in WcCtrl. The screen dump above is from this ones avi). The third one which has a similar histogram to the second one was taken at 80% gain due to the increase in magnification.
Last edited by [1ponders]; 10-07-2006 at 08:35 PM.
I missed you comment about using the Neximager (One-eyed ToUcamer ). Because of the differenct chip set (whatever that means ) it apparently doesn't work the same as the ToUcam. I'd like to give the Neximager a go one day to do a comparison, but until that time I'd suggest listening to Lester and Asi, (and Robert_T) they are our resident NI gurus around here
will do- heres the info, my comp is a celeron processor (6 months old) with a 2.9GZ speed, 512MB ram 'but' i have virtually nothing on it- i tried regis last night and 5 hours later it was still running- so i cut the AVI to 300 frames as used the smaller alignment square- this is an untouched final with a single run through regis-- for the record- i did have a ToUcam cam- i thought it would be better so i researched the chip and they were the same- i inspected both with a high power magnifying glass and couldnt see any differecne- what happened was after trying AVI,s with both cams- i ended up with the same images- so i put the blame on myself- one might of faired slightly better- but i think that due to seeing conditions and either one could of spit out a better image on any given night-i must be the fault here--
ease up on the wavelettes(?)?
![[1ponders]'s Avatar](../vbiis/customavatars/avatar45_9.gif){kind=avatar}
And I thought my laptop was slow. What sort of machine are you processing on? 
). Because of the differenct chip set (whatever that means 
