Gstar Ex

[netwolf]

Craig, Frame integration is what you have deduced it to be. The camera internally can be set to stack frames together and provide a combined output. You can also take get the video without integration and latter stack it yourself. But on of the objectives of this camera is for visual observers to see the faint and fuzzies live on screen, in almost real time. This is quiet usefull under ligh poluted skies, combined with a small hi-res CCTV display you can see faint and fuzzies that you would not make out in the EP.

Regards

[csb (Craig)]

Thanks, MyAstro confirmed SenseUp is the name for Gstar's video integration mode.

However they said that the individual frames that make up each "refresh" image are not available for processing. You just stack the "refresh" images together.

Of course you can use the camera out of SenseUp and then have all frames available.

I'm understanding this a lot more now. The Senseup shows brighter images because it is a stack of all the shots taken in that cycle.

Jeanette, I wonder why the image you sent me seems to have the individual frames available (for viewing at least in VirtualDub). Was it taken in SenseUp mode.

I know from 1ponders & unipol imaging, that the DMK 21AF04 can take the quality I want. Gstar has a bigger chip. And then there is the SAC 4-2.

If you all meet at Astrofest then it would be great if you took some shots of the sun - I'll be glad to pay for any film you use

This camera seems to be suitable for what I want, imaging the sun in Ha. I'm just waiting for acceptance in the Gstar users group as it has some pics taken through a PST with the camera.

If you do meet at Astrofest, I sure would like some images of the sun, preferably with PST, to compare the 3 cameras (Thanks 1ponders). I'd be glad to pay for any film you use

[ballaratdragons (Ken)]

Originally Posted by csb

I'd be glad to pay for any film you use

I don't think that will be of any concern.

The real problem will be finding a 1 hour developing shop near any Astro event

[csb (Craig)]

[[1ponders] (Paul)]

Filum????? What's that. Where does it go in a camera? You have battery, you have storage card....what does filum do?????

[netwolf]

Craig, under normal mode with integration turned off (senseup turned off) you would get 25fps from a PAL Camera. At max integration sensup setting you will only get 1 frame every 2.56s But if you capture this for 1 minute you would still see multiple frames but it would look like a slide show more than a video clip. This is what you saw in the clip you have from jjjnettie.

Essentially the 2.56s max mode is adding ~63frames(25+25+13) to give you 1 frame every 2.56s. You can capture this from the camera's video output via a capture card on your computer. Thats possibly what jjjnettie has sent you. Of course you can further add/stack these 2.56s (integrated exposures) together to get even more detail.

I hope i got that right.

Regards
Fahim

[csb (Craig)]

Thanks, Fahim.

Explained clear and simple. That is all good for what I want to do.

With this camera I don't need to get a laptop. Gstar was becoming my preference...until I looked at pixel size.

The pixels in Gstar - 8.5 x 8.3 micron
compared to DMK - 5.6 x 5.6 micron

Then I found this at Finger Lakes Instrumentation www.fli-cam.com :

A primary factor in achieving high resolution images is to match your telescope's focal length to your CCD's pixels size. All things being equal, a long focal length telescope will give better results with large pixels and a short focal length telescope will give better results with small pixels.

Under steady skies, the best combination of telescope focal length and pixel size will result in 2 arc-seconds of sky per pixel. For example, an ideal match for a 9 micron pixel is a telescope of 36" focal length (such as a 8" f4.5, 6" f6). An 8 inch Schmidt-Cassegrin telescope (80" focal length), even with a focal reducer, is oversampled (too many pixels per star).

I verified this info on other sites and all agreed - also found a simple table that showed about 6micron is good size for the 400mm focal length of the PST.

So it is probably the DMK or SAC4 II for my solar imaging - darn, I really liked the features on the Gstar, but I'm after detail and resolution.

Sorry, didn't mean to hijack this thread nor end it - but I thought this info may be useful for others.

So, Jeanette, has your thread helped your understanding of SenseUp, it sure helped mine

[ballaratdragons (Ken)]

Originally Posted by csb

Thanks, Fahim.

Explained clear and simple. That is all good for what I want to do.

With this camera I don't need to get a laptop. Gstar was becoming my preference...until I looked at pixel size.

The pixels in Gstar - 8.5 x 8.3 micron
compared to DMK - 5.6 x 5.6 micron

Then I found this at Finger Lakes Instrumentation www.fli-cam.com :

A primary factor in achieving high resolution images is to match your telescope's focal length to your CCD's pixels size. All things being equal, a long focal length telescope will give better results with large pixels and a short focal length telescope will give better results with small pixels.

Under steady skies, the best combination of telescope focal length and pixel size will result in 2 arc-seconds of sky per pixel. For example, an ideal match for a 9 micron pixel is a telescope of 36" focal length (such as a 8" f4.5, 6" f6). An 8 inch Schmidt-Cassegrin telescope (80" focal length), even with a focal reducer, is oversampled (too many pixels per star).

I verified this info on other sites and all agreed - also found a simple table that showed about 6micron is good size for the 400mm focal length of the PST.

So it is probably the DMK or SAC4 II for my solar imaging - darn, I really liked the features on the Gstar, but I'm after detail and resolution.

Sorry, didn't mean to hijack this thread nor end it - but I thought this info may be useful for others.

So, Jeanette, has your thread helped your understanding of SenseUp, it sure helped mine

Thank You Craig, that is very useful information

[[1ponders] (Paul)]

That is all true, Craig, but it is more relevant for DSO than planetary and solar imaging. For solar system stuff smaller pixel size is more important. You might find this thread interseting. In particular check out the image that Dennis has posted. For planetary (and solar and luna) imaging, the longer your telescope the smalller the pixel size, within reason. With DSO you are looking for a resolution of around 2 arcsec/pixel as an average, planetary you go for 0.5 and smaller (assuming the seeing will allow it).

[csb (Craig)]

Very helpful, thanks.

For imaging through the PST + 2x barlow:
DMK we get - 1.45 arc-sec per pixel
Gstar gives - 2.20 arc-sec per pixel

For me the DMK has been proven by the images posted at IIS and others. I saw some taken with the Gstar and a Mintron, but they were not so good (solar only).

It certainly seems reasonale and I can understand that solar system objects would have differing parameter optimums from deep space.

I have time to research and hopefully wait for Astrofest, still deciding on laptop.

[okiscopey (Mike)]

Originally Posted by [1ponders]

Filum????? What's that. Where does it go in a camera?

It was some sort of primitive version of our CCD and CMOS systems.

Apparently the sensors 'wore out' or got 'used up' and a new lot had to be moved into place after every exposure. I vaguely recall they were on some sort of strip of fabric or plastic, probably the latter as all the sensor arrays had to be immersed in a series of liquids .. and all in the dark!

No wonder filum didn't survive, although it seems you didn't need a computer to look at the images, so it wasn't all bad.

[[1ponders] (Paul)]

So you just took a photo with this "filum", dunked it up and down in some liquid and there you have it an image. Wow wonders never cease. Makes using a normal camera seem a lot of work to get an image.

Craig you certainly won't be doubting if you get the DMK. It is a proven performer in the monchrome arena, especially for solar. Planets are a much more of a challenge though Welcome to the world of RGB colour capture.

[astroron (Ron)]

Originally Posted by okiscopey

It was some sort of primitive version of our CCD and CMOS systems.

Apparently the sensors 'wore out' or got 'used up' and a new lot had to be moved into place after every exposure. I vaguely recall they were on some sort of strip of fabric or plastic, probably the latter as all the sensor arrays had to be immersed in a series of liquids .. and all in the dark!

No wonder filum didn't survive, although it seems you didn't need a computer to look at the images, so it wasn't all bad.

It didn't do to bad ,it lasted over a hundred years

[[1ponders] (Paul)]

Too true Ron. These days you are flat out getting a format to still be recognized after 10 years. It is a real concern for many, what is going to happen to the billions of Gigabytes of images around these days. How can we ensure they will still be able to be read in 20 years, let alone 100 years.

[astroron (Ron)]

As Carl Sagen once said something like "you can read a Stone Tablet a couple of thousand years old but cannot read or watch something only twenty years old"

[ballaratdragons (Ken)]

Originally Posted by [1ponders]

Too true Ron. These days you are flat out getting a format to still be recognized after 10 years. It is a real concern for many, what is going to happen to the billions of Gigabytes of images around these days. How can we ensure they will still be able to be read in 20 years, let alone 100 years.

Print them out

[csb (Craig)]

Put them in the Mormon's Geneology vault.

[that_guy (Tony)]

sorry to bring up this ultimately oldie thread but ive been treading the idea that gstar ex clr camera can work as a guider as said on the website? using a lens and such, is it possible? when i looked at the initial diagram, i saw no ST4 Ports on the back help?!

cheers,
tony

[erick (Eric)]

The only functioning output on the back of a GSTAR-EX Clr that I know of is a video out BNC.

[tonybarry (Tony)]

With some software + hardware, the GStar could be used as a guider.

You would need a guiding application (e.g. PhD) from Stark Labs (free), and a laptop to run it on.

You would need a Belkin F5U228 or similar framegrabber, with drivers.

You would need a GPUSB box from Shoestring Astronomy ... which translates guiding info to guiding electrical signals.

And a scope with a guide port.

This will get you guiding.

Regards,
Tony Barry