Jump to content

sgl_imaging_challenge_2021_annual.thumb.jpg.3fc34f695a81b16210333189a3162ac7.jpg

symmetal

Members
  • Posts

    1,585
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    2

Everything posted by symmetal

  1. Under Settings/Updates/Advanced Options, there is the 'Pause updates' option where you can delay any updates being applied for up to 35 days by setting a date where they will resume. I think this option is only available with Win 10 Pro and not Home, so that option should be there for you. Alan
  2. If the 12V connects before the ground then it's possible the device will find a temporary ground via a USB cable or maybe other metalwork in contact before it gets its proper XLR ground. While not desireable, as a USB cable or similar route will be higher resistance so leading to a momentary low 12V on the device just connected, I can't see this in itself causing fuses to blow. What value fuses have you used for the ones blowing, and powering what? Car blade fuses under 20A from the usual sources are almost certainly quick blow types so it may just be the initial power surge on connection eventually blowing them if they're too low. I use a 5A fuse for the mount and 3A fuses for the other items. Re-wiring the XLRs with conventional pin numbering is a good move though, if you have the inclination to do so. Alan
  3. What price for peace of mind though. Alan
  4. The 071 has 4.78um pixels and the 6200 and 1600 are similar at 3.76 and 3.8um. The 178 had a similar pixel spacing to the 1600 but has 2.4um pixels. Although the 178 seemed to display a faint dot midway between the pixels too. All very interesting, particularly the central spots behaviours between cameras. No sign of clear weather for the moment so can't confirm whether my assumption for the cover slip location on the 1600 is correct. Alan
  5. An interesting development with different cameras. ASI071MC. The pixel dots are much closer together and only one bright spot is visible at the assumed centre of rotation. It was slightly out so adjusted with the built in tilt plate very easily. ASI1600MM with filter wheel, M42 to M48 adapter and M48 tilt adjuster. Wide spaced pixels like on the 6200MM but this time many more dots to choose from. I counted 6 around the centre, though some were very faint and while the camera was rotated they changed from all being roughly coincident to being spaced apart when rotated 180 degrees. Here it is before adjustment showing the large tilt error again. I chose the brightest spot which wasn't coincident with the pixel grid but this may not be correct and will have to do a star test to confirm. When adjusted to centre this spot the other spots still went from roughly coincident to widely separated as before. This spot was the same brightness as the pixels this time. The Baader L filter in the filter wheel may have been adding some visible reflections this time as each pixel dot had several faint spots associated with it. Maybe the Beyer matrix somehow made the OSC camera pixels appear close together for some reason. I'll try my ASI178MM and ASI178MC cameras to see if they exhibit the same phenomena. Edit: I redid the 1600MM choosing the bright spot closest to the centre pixel spot as the one to centre on as the further bright spot is probably the front window. As they change spacing depending on rotation could imply that the front window is tilted wrt the sensor. Edit again: The 178MM and 178MC produced the same wide grid spacing though there is also a faint dot between the bright pixel dots so the Beyer matrix doesn't affect it. Alan
  6. Thanks gorann. I've always put black tape around the outside rim of my tilt adjusters to avoid that possibility. Taking flats or darks during the day in particular would be risky having a visible gap on show. I'm surprised the filter in the path didn't seem to give a visible reflection. Maybe they are really good coatings. I think it's beneficial putting as much of the imaging train as possible on the jig to also eliminate any potential tilt errors from all the adapters and couplings. If you swap cameras a lot it's worth checking each camera on its own and then through the imaging train once on the jig just to check the train is good. Alan
  7. Made my version of the jig and it's a great success. Cut up an odd piece of 18mm ply for the box and 3D printed a camera holder to fit a 2" nosepiece, or if you're lucky a 2" diameter 48mm extension spacer as the one on my FLT98/ASI6200MM was exactly 2" outside diameter. Also made a 3D holder for the laser pen angled at 10 degrees. I tried one at 13 degrees but it was more critical in laser placement and the 10 degree one worked fine. A clothes peg makes a handy on/off lock. Here it is with the 6200, filter wheel, tilt adjuster and a 16.5mm long 48mm spacer fitting nicely in the 3D printed adapter. The filter wheel unbalancing it had no effect on laser pointing. The 3D adapter centre hole is 51.00mm across. I did make one with 50.90mm diameter but it was rather too stiff to turn. Here's two initial images with the camera rotated around 180 degrees between them. As you can see it was way off. There were 3 laser dots near the centre. One appears to be aligned with the pixel grid, the opposite one was much brighter, with a faint dot between them. I assumed the brightest one was the sensor cover but it didn't matter in reality as when the tilt was adjusted to optimum, all three dots stayed in the same place while the camera was rotated. I needed to put a lot of tilt adjustment with a gap on one side around 0.5mm as can be seen on the picture. The filter being in the path didn't seem to affect it and reflections from it weren't visible. It was clear this evening so went for a test image and have never had the left side stars so good. The far right hand side shows rather bad coma but the star centres are sharp. Not bad for a full frame sensor. The coma was there before adjustment, but didn't appear so bad as the stars were more out of focus. The CCDI images look good and corners pretty similar with zero tilt reported, (first time ever). CCDI seems to ignore coma and just use the star centre for the test. Here's the corner crops of the test image. If not for the coma I'd be very happy but I don't have to keep fiddling with the tilt anymore as I know it's optimum. I tried another image rotated 90 degrees and it was very similar. I'll have to live with the coma but it's only on the far right, and binned 2x2 it won't look so bad. Wonder if Es Reid can align the scope to improve it, as I did buy the FLT98 from FLO. Alan
  8. Since getting the 6200 I haven't really felt the need for mosaics which was the main reason for getting it. Astro Pixel Processor is highly regarded for its mosaic capabilities though I haven't used it for mosaics myself, just for stacking. I imagine it balances the mosaic panels to match, though someone who has used it can confirm. Alan
  9. Great composition. My 6200 with the FLT98 has coma effects on 2 corners but I don't feel so bad about it now if a Takahashi has similar. With mine it's considerably worse on OIII compared to other filters. Blue is much better which seems strange, unless the triplet correction happens to be worse near a particular wavelength coinciding with OIII. As an observation, I would say the black point is set a bit high on the bottom right quadrant compared to the others which has also reduced the saturation on that panel. It has a good 3D feel to the picture with the Crescent appearing in the foreground with the 'waves' coming towards you. Alan
  10. Hi Paul, Here's my efforts with Startools. I did a 3x3 and 4x4 bin version to compare. Startools 'Wipe' module did a pretty good job with the vignetting, better on the 4x4 bin version. I managed to reveal the blue centre of the galaxy and some of the stars show some colour too. Side by side the galaxy colour is a bit green on the 3x3 version. Binned 4x4 Binned 3 x 3 Alan
  11. Much better on the noise front. If you want to post your stacked image, I could see what Startools can do to get some colour. Alan
  12. Good to know it's real from the galaxy, and that Startools or Photoshop wasn't taking liberties. Alan
  13. Here's a crop of my M31 image showing M110 which may help. It's 60 mins each of RG and B and 90 mins of L under Bortle 3 skies. I don't know if the blue centre is actually from the galaxy itself or the star which happens to be in line with it. Your image has captured the two darker regions around the centre well. Alan
  14. Well done for focusing on an overlooked object, normally relegated to being Andromeda's bland side-kick. I think you would benefit from some dithering to reduce the colour noise in the background. My image of M31 I recently completed showed a hint of blue at the centre of M110. Your image colour balance is a bit too yellow though to possibly show it. Alan
  15. Very good. I think you would benefit from doing some star halo removal using this tip for photoshop if you have it. It helped with my version having blue halos. The green halos are a bit jarring and the blue halos show most in the last image joining the stars together making it look like strings of star filaments. Alan
  16. Managed to finish off collecting data the past few days. ASI6200MM and FLT98. 4 hrs for Ha and 2.5 hrs each for SII and OIII. Stacked in Astro Pixel Processor, processed in Startools, where it was binned 50%, and final tweaks in PS. The blue halos from the OIII filter were dominant again, but found the PS Camera Raw filter/Optics/Defringe module does a great job of neutralizing them and even lets some of the underlying colour then show through. I followed this guide which is very quick to use. For very bright stars a second or third run of the Defringe helps using the eyedropper on the residual fringe to select the starting colour and then tweak the sliders to taste. I mask just the offending star for multiple defringes though I don't think it's necessary to mask it, as it doesn't seem to affect the rest of the image once their fringes are gone. It's rotated 180 deg as i think it looks better that way. I could have got the vertical framing a bit better as I've cut off some of the bottom, (or really top). Click for full size. Thanks for looking. Alan
  17. The brightest reflection which is close to the plane occupied by the pixels is the sensor cover plate which seems to be the one to use. The filter will be so far in front its reflections will be way off to one side I would hope. That would certainly help but means removing the front plate of the filter wheel. Currently there is no sign of dust on the filter flats so I would prefer not to risk getting some. Alan
  18. I'd like to try this on my ASI6200 but the camera is fixed to the filter wheel with 4 screws and to remove the camera means removing the filter wheel front cover and one of the 2" filters. Currently I have a Gerd-Neumann M48 tilt adjuster fitted before the filter wheel which I've adjusted looking at images but I think it could be better than it is. It may be that the FLT98 alignment is slightly out in covering full frame but it would be nice to know if this is the case. Can anyone see why the Olly's method wouldn't work if I kept the filter wheel and tilt adjuster attached while making the test. There will be two extra reflections from the filter surfaces and the laser may have to be a bit more on axis in order to reach the sensor. Also the filter wheel will make it lop-sided so will have to ensure the tilt adjuster front surface is kept in flat contact with the testing surface while rotating it. I could attach a counterbalance weight to correct the filter wheel inbalance for the test I suppose. Alan
  19. Stacking in APP does take ages with lots of large files. I like to assume that at least it's doing a good job. I only use it for stacking at the moment and now run APP and Startools on my gaming PC with an i9 processor, 32GB ram and RTX2070 graphics card. Stacking around 300 images from my ASI6200 with 116MB image files can still take around 2 hours. On my usual i7 PC it would likely take around 5 to 6 hours. I used to use Astroart for stacking, which is much quicker, but found I would sometimes get strange background banding artifacts when using Develop in Startools. With APP stacking I don't, so use that now and put up with the wait. Very impressive looking mosaic by the way. Alan
  20. The power pinout diagram for the AZ-EQ6 is the same as your EQ8 diagram and I can confirm for the AZ-EQ6 that pin 1 is Ground. The drawn images are looking at the connectors from the front as if you're looking at the mount from the outside. It's convention to wire pin 1 to ground on multipole connectors, but not a rule. The quickest way to check is with your multimeter on continuity check and power to the mount removed, check for a short on one of the two mount power pins to the mount metalwork, (one of the screws holding the power panel in place is ideal). The pin that's shorted to the metalwork is Ground. Alan
  21. You're right Olly that a camera on any mount can create a mosaic by pointing the camera at the celestial coords corresponding to the centre of each panel of the mosaic. My argument is only concerning the resultant orientation of the camera for each panel. Here's a Photoshop drawing showing the extreme option of a 4 panel mosaic centred on the Celestial Pole using 3 different mounts which illustrates the point. The camera isn't touched between panels. For high declination mosaics EQ mounts present extra challenges, although of course don't suffer from field rotation like the other two will. Imaging software which generate mosaic panel coords, (at least the ones I've looked at) don't consider this feature of EQ mounts and assume mosaics are constructed as if it's just a camera on a tripod. Alan
  22. No it's not field rotation as one image doesn't rotate during capture. The cartography problem of fitting a sphere to a flat surface is the same no matter which point on the sphere is chosen to be the centre of your flat surface. With an EQ mount , at Dec zero there is no mosaic panel image rotation if RA is changed. The effect is a consequence of the mount design rather than a surface mapping problem. Alan
  23. Yes, It doesn't seem to be mentioned when dealing with mosaics for some reason but becomes clear when you think about it. If you keep a constant declination and move the scope in RA it follows that line of declination. As shown in the star chart below lines of RA are always at right-angles to lines of Declination, so to maintain that condition the camera has to rotate its orienation too, being locked to RA. You could always rotate the camera orientation for each mosaic image but it's too much trouble to work out how much. Alan
  24. A point to note is that with an EQ mount there will be image rotation between mosaic frames that differ in RA, so you need to ensure any overlap covers this. The rotation amount depends on the Declination of the target. At Dec 0 there is no rotation and it increases with an increase in Dec being very significant nearer the pole. Here's the effect at around Declination 60 Alan
  25. It's dificult to say but I've tended to find star shapes that aren't just elongated pointing towards the centre, would indicate the spacing is too great. There may be tilt as well as the top stars show a different orientation to the bottom ones. I would make a fairly large FF adjustment at first of around 3mm or so to get an idea of what shape stars are when it's definately too far or too near and go from there. Alan
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue. By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.