As the seeing was pretty good on the night, I captured quite a lot of data I am now slowing processing. So I thought that instead of opening a thread each time I wanted to saw a new image, I would just use one thread to post the best pictures of my imaging session.
To start with here are Clavius and Gassendi (Both with ASI120MM).
All captures are processed in Avistack 2, resulting staked images are deconvoluted in Astra Image. The final image is adjusted for levels in GIMP.
Nice work Eric – some classical favourites in that set.
Have you tried using Autostakkert? Once I eventually mastered it, I found it to be much quicker at processing AVI’s than how I was using AviStack, although as I’m self-taught there is no guarantee that I am using either application effectively or optimally!
Nice work mate. Looks like it was reasonable seeing.
John, thank you. For my area it was good seeing, which doesn't happen very often.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dennis
Nice work Eric – some classical favourites in that set.
Have you tried using Autostakkert? Once I eventually mastered it, I found it to be much quicker at processing AVI’s than how I was using AviStack, although as I’m self-taught there is no guarantee that I am using either application effectively or optimally!
Cheers
Dennis
Thanks Dennis. I use autostakkert too. However, I tend to have slightly better results with Avistack2 on the Moon. I agree the process takes longer (as I use it in 'all manual' mode). But I feel I have more control on frame selection. Autostakkert works better than AS2 for planets though in my limited experience.
Very nice images Eric! How is your tracking on the moon? My Dob can be troublesome when lunar imaging making mosaics difficult. How are you finding the ASI cam compared to imaging source?
Re tracking, I usually track manually (using the synscan hand controller). After a bit of practice is quite easy for panoramic shots, a bit more difficult for close-up shots where there is going to be quite a lot of movement because of the high magnification (ASI + 2.5 powermate). In that case I only capture 200 or 300 frames. AutoStacker 2 allows me to get rid of frames that have deviated too much from the reference point. So I compensate that way. I know this is not ideal and I should really set up my dobs properly for tracking. With perfect tracking I could possibly improve my shots a bit. The ASI beats the DMK41 on planets because of the higher frame-rate.
Re ASI120MM vs DMK41, it's difficult to say I have more experience using the DMK and as, I believe, I haven't yet used the ASI in optimal conditions. I think they performance is fairly similar. However, the ASI gives a softer texture to the captures than the DMK. I have attached 2 images of Sinus Iridum taken during te same session for comparison. The first one is with the ASI the second one is with the DMK. I had to down-scale the DMK picture so that the scale of both pictures would be comparable (loss of quality compared with the original TIF format in both cases).
1. Clavius region (DMK)
2. Copernicus region (ASI)
3. Copernicus region (DMK)
After comparing quite a few captures of the same Moon features and processing them. As far as I am concerned, the jury is still out as to which of the DMK41 or the ASI120MM is better. Let me put it this way: they are both very decent camera, but they perform differently depending on which area of the Moon your are capturing and on the conditions on the night. Also, because they have different chips, they can serve different purposes. Sometime the ASI wins, sometimes, the DMK does. All in all, I am glade I have both!
Re tracking, I usually track manually (using the synscan hand controller). After a bit of practice is quite easy for panoramic shots, a bit more difficult for close-up shots where there is going to be quite a lot of movement because of the high magnification (ASI + 2.5 powermate). In that case I only capture 200 or 300 frames. AutoStacker 2 allows me to get rid of frames that have deviated too much from the reference point. So I compensate that way. I know this is not ideal and I should really set up my dobs properly for tracking. With perfect tracking I could possibly improve my shots a bit. The ASI beats the DMK41 on planets because of the higher frame-rate.
Re ASI120MM vs DMK41, it's difficult to say I have more experience using the DMK and as, I believe, I haven't yet used the ASI in optimal conditions. I think they performance is fairly similar. However, the ASI gives a softer texture to the captures than the DMK. I have attached 2 images of Sinus Iridum taken during te same session for comparison. The first one is with the ASI the second one is with the DMK. I had to down-scale the DMK picture so that the scale of both pictures would be comparable (loss of quality compared with the original TIF format in both cases).
Cheers,
Eric
Interesting to hear you don't activate the tracking Eric. I guess you are running 100+fps with the ASI so only need a few secs of capture? I've recently got the QHY5L-ll mono which has the same chip as asi120mm and hope to take advantage of its larger fov compared to my dfk 21. Unfortunately my 5x powermate is producing f40ish with the QHY so looks like I will be using 3x barlow instead.
For sure AS!2 is great for aligning shifting images compared to registax which for me has proven a disaster with the Dob tracking.
Interesting to hear you don't activate the tracking Eric. I guess you are running 100+fps with the ASI so only need a few secs of capture? I've recently got the QHY5L-ll mono which has the same chip as asi120mm and hope to take advantage of its larger fov compared to my dfk 21. Unfortunately my 5x powermate is producing f40ish with the QHY so looks like I will be using 3x barlow instead.
For sure AS!2 is great for aligning shifting images compared to registax which for me has proven a disaster with the Dob tracking.
Have you tried any Planetary imaging?
The main reason for not activating automatic tracking (most of the time) is that the area where I set the scope is uneven. So it takes a while to get the scope levelled. I don't often have the time to do it (bad practice, I know ). As you say, I only capture a few seconds. I have done all sort of trials with different length of capture (up to 2000 frames on the Moon). It looks like the sweet spot for me is about 400-600 frames. Short enough to avoid major deviation and long enough to have plenty of frames to choose from.
I haven't been able to use the x5 powermate on the Moon yet; the seeing has never been good enough.
AS I am only new to AP, I don't have a huge experience in planetary. I managed a few acceptable Jupiter shots (see here: http://www.iceinspace.com.au/forum/a...e.php?a=131303). But nothing compared to your pictures. I am keen to improve though.
BTW, do you have any focusing issue fitting a filter wheel on your dob?
Thats a nice Jupiter shot Eric. I don't have a filter wheel yet, I've been experimenting with combining my colour DFK shots with the mono using Winjupos and its working rather well especially when using an IR pass filter. http://www.iceinspace.com.au/forum/s...d.php?t=105455
Thats a nice Jupiter shot Eric. I don't have a filter wheel yet, I've been experimenting with combining my colour DFK shots with the mono using Winjupos and its working rather well especially when using an IR pass filter. http://www.iceinspace.com.au/forum/s...d.php?t=105455
Your technique is interesting. I am not proficient enough with Winjupos to be able to do anything like that. Are you happy about your IR 742? I have been thinking about getting one.
Thanks for the link. ZuoZhao takes great pictures. The Moon panorama is brilliant! It goes to show how far one can take the ASI120MM (or equivalent camera).
I've only used the IR filter a couple of times so far on Jupiter and have been very impressed by the extra detail especially in poor seeing. Plan to use it on high mag lunar images and Saturn.
I've only used the IR filter a couple of times so far on Jupiter and have been very impressed by the extra detail especially in poor seeing. Plan to use it on high mag lunar images and Saturn.
Wouldn't that IR filter be pretty equal to using the R filter from a set of LRGB filter set, or not? I've found it to be excellent for cutting through nasty seeing but obviously only on mono moon data.
). As you say, I only capture a few seconds. I have done all sort of trials with different length of capture (up to 2000 frames on the Moon). It looks like the sweet spot for me is about 400-600 frames. Short enough to avoid major deviation and long enough to have plenty of frames to choose from.
