Jump to content

Banner.jpg.b89429c566825f6ab32bcafbada449c9.jpg

rorymultistorey

Members
  • Posts

    113
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

Everything posted by rorymultistorey

  1. HI, I've done a review. 😁 https://astrobiscuit.com/2023/02/07/cq350-mount-review/ I think its pretty good. Tar Rory
  2. Just to say MASSIVE thx to this thread. My new threadripper amd desktop did not work with my old usb2 asi120mm. Driver issues. Cost me the good part of a precious night of imaging. SOLUTION (as said above): Download this firmware update (windows) : https://download.astronomy-imaging-camera.com/download/usb-camera-windows/?wpdmdl=258 and update to the asi120mm compatible firmware option. You loose a little bit in the framerate dept but that's not biggie when guiding. Thx so much all.
  3. Actually we're having a town hall about choosing the next target tomorrow 8pm in "the bat chat" channel. You'll need to have passed the bat exam first before you can join - which is as easy as dropping a pic that you've taken in the bat exam channel. One of our team will then let you in... hold on a minute, your already in aren't you. You should have had a notification about the meeting.
  4. this is very interesting I didn't know about the Altair model... Also noob question what are the different modes/different coloured lines about.
  5. Yes of course.😊 The WHOLE point of the Big Amateur Telescope is to test stuff out and that is what we are setting up to do. Its a journey we are going on together. So far we have 60 amateurs so far from all over the world. Many very knowledgeable and a few with surprisingly big scopes (like 50cm). (We might even be getting one of these big scopes paired up a large pixel low read noise full frame camera which potentially could have a go a 10ms imaging on the brighter targets- wow) BTW according to they guy who images at keck there is still a benefit from 2 second exposures. Not as much benefit as millisecond exposures but it is significant.
  6. vlaiv first off thank you for being such a gentleman. Sometimes I am an idiot. I would put a ruder word in here in place of idiot but you know kids and all... The other thing is that it feels like you think I don't know this stuff but I guess you're not actually talking to me. However I do worry that your missing the big point. The big point is that the biggeest source of blurryness dominates all others (thats the sqrt(FWHM_seeing^2 + FWHM_aperture^2) equation talking) If you boil it all down to something really simple then you can say... like I did in the video - that the biggest source of blurryness for a telescope larger than 6 inches in diameter is -assuming its a good scope that has been well collimated - more often than not the seeing. And as you know I'm interesting in overcoming the seeing. One of my members is directly imaging exoplanets at the keck observatory and pointed me towards one of his colleagues rather interesting scientific paper on lucky imaging. https://www.ast.cam.ac.uk/sites/default/files/nlaw_lucky_thesis.pdf We can't shoot millisecond exposures of course but even second long exposures reduce dramatically the blurryness from the seeing. For me its like us amateurs have only been imaging in 2nd gear. Its exciting to think that we can go much further. Many of our members don't have scopes that are sharp enough to lucky image with (collimation is a big problem actually) and many don't have cameras with a low enough read noise to lucky image with. I'm still keen that they join in bc we will help them improve and advise them on buying better equipment and we can use their long exposure non lucky imaging data to help reveal detail in fainter structures that are too dim to see through lucky imaging. Some have the equipment but don't yet have the skills to pull off lucky imaging, again we can help them. This is exciting. And if us amateurs pull together and share our data we can to an extent negate the inherent problems associated with short exposure deep space astrophotography and that will give us the power - especially on the bright targets - to match or even better the 1.1arcsecond FWHM that giant scopes like the 4m Mayall on Kitt Peak achieve.
  7. I am truly sorry. Sorry vlaiv. I saw red. I suspect it has as much to do with other things happening right now rather than you. Either way I was out of order.
  8. I just like to say to other readers unsure about whether lucky imaging works or not to check galaxies on astrobin and see how the sharpest ones had exposure lengths of just a few seconds. The proof is in the pudding.
  9. Sounds great. And your absolutely right about having the right camera for the job. I found that in London (bortle 8/9) with my f6 newt I had to shoot out 20 second subs to get enough stars to stack (around 20 is enough) but when I went into the bortle 5 field outside london 5 second subs worked fine. Your cameras pixels are bigger than mine (asi178), and your scope is probably soaking up a similar number of photons. The best thing to do is forget about what the naysayers tell you and just try it. I have APP loaded on my laptop so after I've taken a few subs I can quickly check that they stack. I think your esprit will work very well.
  10. a chap called @geeks on the server is heading that up , at the moment I'm just using google drive bc its so user friendly but when we properly get going I don't know what we're going to switch to.
  11. Yes or at least an HDR image, lucky imaging for the bright bits and regular imaging for the dim bits. It all depends on how many good astrophotographers we get to join up so please spread the word. Thx
  12. thx and you're totally right apart from one thing. Finding quality astrophotographers is harder than finding the IT wizards who sort out how to upload the data😊
  13. SGL is a really great forum. Hats off to FLO for making the community a better place. Cloudy nights has some agenda that i don't quite understand and is full of elitist astronomers. They banned me for posting this request for imagers for instance... To be fair its not going to be easy and you do really need a modern CMOS camera to make it work with the kind of scopes we can afford BUT it will work and ultimately the naysayers will have to admit that they are wrong 🤣
  14. I'm going to have to be brief ....(time). The heart of the theory goes like this. If you had a magical camera with zero read noise you could take million of micro second exposures over the course of a minute stack them up and your stack would have the same snr as a single 60sec exposure.. Obviously we don't have magical cameras yet but we're getting close. Modern CMOS sensors manage about 1e/pix of read noise. The read noise is low enough for us to stack thousands of subs that are only a few seconds long and get good results. The the BAT team we have a guy that images at Keck. He's produced a graph that shows you start to see the benefits of lucky imaging when your exposures drop below 10seconds. You see a really good increase in resolution when you shoot exposures of about a second. And in the future if the next generation of CMOS cameras reduces the read noise further then we will be looking to shoot at about 1/10th sec exposures bc thats when you get even more benefits from lucky imaging. Thats the theory. The reality is that most folks have issues with their set up that needs to be sorted before they're set up is sharp enough to even begin to think about lucky imaging!
  15. Its time that's my problem I don't have time and now I feel bad. I probably deserve to feel bad. Apologies
  16. thx dude. You know this ain't my first time around the block. I disagree with the old school view of sample rate. Take planetary imagers for example. That's all I'm going to say on the matter. Respectfully you go your way and I'll go mine.
  17. Yes it should be obtainable... easily. And yet few manage it. There is no point in even trying lucky imaging until you reach this level of sharpness with your set up. Also I just work in FWHM of stars in arcseconds I don't really know what you mean by - 3"/px and 1.5"/px as far as sampling rate goes - . I think about 0.5arcseconds per pixel is probably quite good but like I said I suspect I'm not understanding what you mean.
  18. Please can you thank them from me. Terry didn't want to give me their emails which is fair enough.
  19. thats actually the camera I want to lucky image with but don't currently have the funds to buy!
  20. Your Kit is amazing. I'd absolutely love to get you involved. I can make a special channel just for the Shropshire Not SO Large Array that only you and your buddies can see and edit etc... And of course you'll be able to access all the other channels that we're putting together to help build the BAT too. Together we're stronger. I think the platform we're setting up has the foundations to grow. I have a great team all working for free on this project - one guy images at the Keck observatory - but to succeed we need to tempt the very best astrophotgraphers... not necessarily the biggest scopes but folks who really understand how we can make this project fly.
  21. Everyone loves the Terry scene (except me!) Terry hasn't watched the video yet bc he doesn't have speakers on his computer. Bless!
  22. So we are splitting our imagers into two camps. The regulars are aiming to get the FWHM of their stars to less than 5arcseconds wide and the elite lucky imagers are currently aiming to go less than 2.5arcseconds wide. Obviously we will start to push for more resolution soon. We haven't actually started lucky imaging yet what with it not getting dark and all but its clear a lot of folks need help with collimation etc before they can even start thinking about lucky imaging. We currently only have a handful of ELITEs who are nearly ready to push their kit to attain higher resolutions and I am very keen to find more. It would take me too long to explain everything here, suffice to say that their is a mountain to climb but we can see a path to the top. I'm very lucky to have a good team helping. Now we need to get in more imagers who know what they are doing.
  23. You sir know what your talking about. I would really love you to join. BTW do you mean 268 not 266. I am very keen to get more folks in who know their onions. 0.853"/px is fine.
  24. Hey folks, If you can shoot deep space targets well then I'd love you to join the BAT. Our goal is to gather amateurs from all over the world and for us all to shoot the same target, share our data and produce images that will rival big professional scopes. We are training folks up to shoot high resolution deep space images using the LUCKY IMAGING technique. The resolution we are able to achieve is really exciting but for the BAT to work we need lots of data and for that we need more good quality astrophotographers to join. The BAT members are working together on my discord server which is excellent for sharing ideas and working through problems together. If you want to join up here is the invite: https://discord.gg/WK8qmrqcpq This is the video which really set the whole thing off and explains how us lowly amateurs are able to achieve resolution similar to that of multi million dollar telescopes
×
×
  • 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.