Trippelforge

PixInsight For every rejected frame it's "X" amount of data loss, that's what I am confused about. But perhaps I am not understanding things correctly. Say I take for example an hours worth of images at 5 minutes each, that's a total of 12 images (obviously). But if due to the longer exposures it caused me to lose say 4-5 images I just lost 1/3 of my data.

Every time I push my exposures time up I tend to lose a lot of data. Mostly due to streaks from satellites, which has caused me to stick to around 45 seconds. How are people doing much longer exposures with so many of the damn things up there?

Hi Steve, Luckily I can solder, but thanks for the offer!

Thank you so much Alan, I really do appreciate your help! Things started to get a bit confusing for me (obviously). I am going to order the first one, L722A as you suggest, excited to get the mount back up and running!

Someone told me they think the actual plug is 2.10 not 2.00mm, the only thing Digikey has in 2.10mm is this: https://www.digikey.com/en/products/detail/switchcraft-inc/L722RA/1289482 It looks kind of odd though due to the angle of the pins. Is there a way for me to check the plug, for instance if I used a gage pin for the inside, and calipers for the outside does that give you exactly what it's suppose to be? That's probably a dumb question, but I want to make sure it's a perfect fit. Thanks for the help!

That's the end that pushes into the hole correct? I need the receiving end that is attached to the mount. I found this, there are few styles listed, not sure of the difference as the images look the same, one says panel mount, the other through hole. Do you think this is the correct part? https://www.digikey.com/en/products/detail/switchcraft-inc/L722A/241928 This is the other: https://www.digikey.com/en/products/detail/switchcraft-inc/PCL722A/1289408 Anyhow they both have three leads? There are only two wires going to the board.

Can you share the full link, it seems to have cut off the complete URL. Ugh what a pain though, you would think Celestron could simply sell that part. So you are saying worst case I can rig something up as long as it fits the male end of the power supply connector? And I assume solder on the little wires attached to the connector? The bulkhead if I know what you mean is what seemingly broke, but if I could've gotten the entire unit (with board connector) it would've been plug and play obviously. Thanks for the help!

Hey guys! Last night I went to plug in my AVX and the power plug ended up getting stuck and broke the internal connector. I tried searching awhile for simply a replacement, but came up empty handed. I was a bit relieved to find out it was a fairly simple plug and play part (not soldered), but regardless it doesn't come up during searches. Can anyone help me out? Thank you!

I just wanted to share my sons image of the Bubble Nebula. He is 15 and we have shared the hobby for a few years, but this image he did all on his own from start to finish. I am very proud of his final result!

Thank you very much! I do not own a flattener, it's good to know about the distance so I can tweak one to get it correct.

My son and I imaged the bubble nebula last week and once processed I noticed the outer edge stars "streaked". Considering the ones in the center are sharp, I assume it wasn't a tracking issue. Are the images coming out like this due to needing a flattener? Or could it have been caused by something else? Thanks!

I'm about to buy a mini-PC and wanted to grab a portable monitor for it. But something I didn't think about was how well they would work in cold temperatures. I had been using a laptop, and frost would form on it without issue. But with winter quickly approaching things are going to get a little rough here. When the thought popped in my mind I went out and did a bit of research and found you aren't supposed to use LCD's or LED's below freezing. I mean I guess the entire "liquid" part makes since. But I know people shoot below 0'C outdoors with computers, so I figured I should ask what everyone's thoughts / experiences were.

I was hoping that was all it was. I am using Celestrons "all-star" alignment procedure. I tried it with and without prior go-to alignment, it worked night one and two, but wouldn't night 3. I even was able to rough align via polaris in NINA's cross hairs night one and it "sort of" worked on it's own. But then I ended up running all-star anyhow. I asked my son if he entered in or double checked the coordinates and time. He hesitated then said yes... makes you wonder though. =P I did find two guides, one by a user and another very detailed one in an article. I am going to make sure I go step by step and so I don't miss anything. If that doesn't work.... well maybe I was one of the ones who's AVX's didn't make it through QC. What kind of sucks is my son and I are driving 3hrs away Saturday to camp and image in a remote area. It's going to be freezing also... so this should be fun. I used all-star polar alignment (Celestron) a few times (slewing all over). I also did so before and after a go-to alignment just for fun. I even "aligned" it via NINA's crosshairs before just to get close. Worked great as I mentioned! But... now I don't know what's going on. Defective? Missed something? I am going to hope that it was just my failure to turn a rod.

Due to the frustration I ran into last night, coupled with the fact I won't be able to get out for awhile. I wanted to ask this simple, albeit pretty dumb question. I have taken my new mount out 3 times now. Night 1 & 2 I was able to get the polar alignment dead on and had zero issues with tracking. Last night I spent an hour trying to get it to track longer than 15 seconds and couldn't. On Night 1 & 2 I was getting around 2 minutes with it locked on, and didn't even try any longer. Once I took my mount in last night I notice when replacing the counter weight that the bar was wiggling, as it seemingly at one point unscrewed itself a bit, so I am thinking it was loose the entire time I was aligning it. The obvious answer is to go shoot again, but it might be awhile. So I wanted to ask if that could've been why I was having issues? Thanks 😃

Thank you! That really cleared things up for me. I haven't ever even seen anything say an ADU rating before. Is that in the RAW image properties itself? Or do I need to open it in specific software? Anyhow I appreciate all of the help, and thanks for taking the time to break it all down.

So simply shoot bias frames, no darks or flats? Ugh, sorry I am getting confused as this entire thing is much more complicated than I at first thought. 😃

I don't dither right now as I don't know how. I know what it is, but software wise I am unsure on how to control it. I have one program (by Celstron) to move the mount, and I use NINA to control everything else. I guess I need to dig more into that as Vlaiv pointed out that they aren't re-usable due to temperature fluctuations. AV mode? You shoot it in video? So is it possible to use solely flats to get rid of some dust spots I have? I will be tight on time tonight but would love to get rid of them. Ya this entire thing is seemingly more complicated than I thought. The dark re-use situation makes sense... and it kind of sucks due to having to re-do that every night. =(

Aren't dark flats most important with dedicated / cooled astro camera's (read that on a random blog)? I am shooting with a DSLR (Nikon D5300). Are you saying that the amount of frames really doesn't make that big of a difference? One question, how long of an exposure should each dark and flat be? I didn't see that mentioned anywhere.

I have been imagine for a few years, yet have never taken calibration frames. It's just something I never took the time to do, perhaps due to laziness or maybe because I was happy enough with my images. But now that my son has joined up in the hobby with me, we want to hit the limits of our equipment. So I think it's time for me to actually take the extra steps for improvement. With that being said I am getting FLOODED with information / opinions on how to deal with calibration frames. Over on cloudy nights there have been some heated debates on the amount of frames overall. And there is a HUGE divide... some are saying 15-20 darks, and some 200+... All I want is a simple metric to start with. First of all am I understanding the reasoning behind each type? 1. Darks help eliminate noise, are re-usable, and you simply cap off the scope to take them. Also they should be taken at the same sensor temperature (and ISO) as the lights. 2. Flats are for vignetting and dust spots. I need to use a t-shirt to cover the scope, and the images need to peak at the middle of the histogram. The imaging train cannot be moved afterwards, hence These are not re-usable. Also I have to use an even light source, or the sky at dusk / dawn. 3. Bias frames simply help read-out noise. Cap the camera or scope and take them as fast as possible, you can re-use them. If I am correct; how many frames do I need? And how long should each exposure be for each type? Apologies on the dead horse topic, I am just getting so many different opinions and wanted to ask here.

I have been using my Nikon for awhile and really never was sure of the optimal ISO setting. Currently I am shooting at 400. I have read that Nikons over all perform better at lower ISO's than Canon's. But I am sure it's more model dependent. I had an old chart but it didn't have the D5300 on it. Thanks 😃

It was shared on Cloudynights by a member, there was a graph as well. I believe he wrote up an entire paper outlining his methodologies (I will look for it). But he is seemingly a fairly well respected member so I just kind of went with it (lol). Anyways my mind was blown as well, I live in a bortal 5/6 zone and my son and I have been planning to go camping this winter to some 2/3 zones. Which obviously looking at the chart is going to be insane.

Funny enough I don't even know anymore HOW I was saying it due to you posting that. Bortle, bortal... ugh. Now I am all messed up...

Someone shared a few charts with me showing the various differences in exposure times, and you are right. It's pretty mind blowing how quickly it rockets upward.

I have been making a list of camping sites via their projected darkness. I mostly stuck to simply the bortal rating of each, but then of course other measurements are presented. But from a simple standpoint I was curious if there was a brightness range that qualifies each bortal number. For example; Site 1: Bortal 4 @ .230 brightness Site 2: Bortal 3 @ .190 brightness Site 3: Bortal 2 @ .188 brightness Does that mean that a Bortal 2 turns to a Bortal 3 at around .190? If so would that mean that the .188 site vs .190 are so close the rating is irrelevant? Side Note: I do understand that the light pollution maps are not exact, and can be outdated. But I was just trying to get a general idea prior to driving across my state.

I am finding out fairly quickly that my new AVX really needs guiding. Which is a let down, but supposedly with guiding it can perform very well. The problem is that I have never owned one before, and I am very low on funds so I am trying to find something reasonable. I know "reasonable" is relative, but I need to know how low I can go, yet get one that's still reliable. I guess that goes also for a finder scope itself... which I just remembered. Thanks!