Jump to content

Stargazers Lounge Uses Cookies

Like most websites, SGL uses cookies in order to deliver a secure, personalised service, to provide social media functions and to analyse our traffic. Continued use of SGL indicates your acceptance of our cookie policy.

sgl_imaging_challenge_banner_supernovae_remnants_winners.thumb.jpg.a13d54fa405efa94ed30e7abd590ee55.jpg

umasscrew39

Members
  • Content Count

    108
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

18 Good

About umasscrew39

  • Rank
    Star Forming

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Interests
    Astronomy (of course), gym rat/weightlifting, outdoor cycling, wood working
  • Location
    Orlando, FL
  1. Hi Martin Agree- studying neural networks are a tad more complicated than a stream of photons being converted into a digital value. If you figure out and decide to setup a dual rig, I am sure that Don and I will come over and help you test things out! Bruce
  2. I am not sure we will ever get a definition of "better" for various reasons. Maybe the assertion that a CMOS is better for shorter exposures vs longer exposures for a CCD is true but I have not seen any large datasets with statistics to back this up. I think this can only be done using various CMOS and CCD cameras on the same scope at the same time on the same ROI, multiple times over various nights under various sky conditions. I doubt this will ever happen. Instead, what we mostly read and hear are the theoretical physics as to why this has to be true. Nothing wrong with that and, in fact, that is extremely important. However, like I have said in the past, if I had a dime every time we (me and my research colleagues) theorized on an outcome of an experiment we planned doing our neuroscience research and theorized "A" but got "B", I could have retired years ago. Nature has a way of fooling us even if we think we have all of the theoretical information to predict the outcome. Besides, in the end, each of us decide "better" for ourselves.
  3. Hi Grant Yes- I think that covers it like I agreed in our exchange the other day and I think it would broaden the appeal. Not sure what all of the in-fighting is about. It was so bizarre to see this on CNs. I just do not get it- this is suppose to be fun hobby. I have enough stress at work. That is why I stopped posting on that forum on CNs. It is just ridiculous what was going on. I am friends with a few very nice folks who left CNs. Anyway, if the name gets revised and helps folks engage more in a friendly way, great. If not, I tried and I'll just be quiet and move on doing my own thing. I am not a big social media guy to begin with. Thanks for the feedback. Bruce
  4. Hi All I am trying to explore the possibility of this forum becoming more active like the electronically-assisted astronomy (EAA)/live viewing on CNs use to be. A lot of the more experienced and most congenial posters have left and it is a real shame. It is how I and others have learned the techniques and simply shared our thoughts and live views, in addition to the fun monthly challenges . I had a nice email exchange with a SGL admin about this, just expressing my opinions to enhance this specific forum. So, I'd like to challenge those interested in EAA/live viewing/realtime views or whatever name you prefer to develop a more active forum. I'd like to start by proposing to have the name Video Astronomy revised to something like: Live Viewing/Electronically-assisted astronomy (EAA) to help attract back more of the lost posters from CNs and add many new folks interested in the approach. Perhaps I am out on an island here and all feel there is no reason to change a thing - just my 2 cents. Bruce
  5. Hi Martin It has been a long time since we've chatted. Seems even longer from the frequent and fun CN chats and challenges. Anyway, nice chart you put together. I would add another column on available software for live viewing and indicating the operating system(s) available for its use. This has always been a critical and hot topic even when I was first learning. The options are not great so they play a critical role in one's choice. Bruce
  6. Hi Martin Very nice variety of objects. I really like the inverted view of the M64 and the ARP galaxies. Good to see how your new software is working along with SLL. It is still amazing to me how good views can be seen with no darks, flats, or no filters- just bad pixel removal. I know what you mean by the weather. I have now been out once in the past 3 months and more bad weather on the way. All the best with continued success using your new software. Bruce
  7. umasscrew39

    C11 f/10 3x30s

    These are spectacular, Don! Can I assume the C11 shots are on the new mount?
  8. Don is just fine. Chatted with him yesterday. I am sure he will be back online soon. Nice of you guys to ask.
  9. Well done Martin. These are always a challenge but a fun one at that and your new EAA tool seems to be coming along. Like Don, I think I have had about 3 nights over the past 3 months where I could actually see something. Continued success on the development of your tool. Bruce
  10. Well, I can try v3.2 but doubt that is it if I am the only one having this problem. It is just so odd as it happens randomly at anytime during a single exposure or after multiple stacks. I did hear that Paul is around but too busy at work to address any SLL questions for now. I will just have to wait until he can re-engage unless I can figure this out or I need to find another software to do this more reliably.
  11. Best of luck in your endeavor, Martin. It sounds very exciting and all of us will benefit from it.
  12. I'm following up on this topic as I noticed over time that I am now unable to get this to work. My first few times this worked flawlessly but then I noticed sporadic responses when I tried it again about a month ago, meaning the color of an individual channel would suddenly turn mono. I switched laptops and tried both the Windows and Mac versions of SLL and it worked at first so I assumed it was something on my Mac the was causing the problem. However,the same thing happened on another mac and my windows compute stick- the signal reverted to mono once again when it should have been in color. So, I am now down to the camera and cable and possible causes. I tried a different cable but of the same brand. I do not have another mono camera to test. I'm in no hurry to resolve this but am really perplexed as to what is causing this as it does not seem that either the cable or camera are likely the reason. Any ideas?
  13. correct- but other factors can affect your exposure time as well (e.g., camera, light pollution, etc)
  14. Thanks, Rob. Very cool !!! Glad our M42 images look alike :-) Can't wait to keep exploring with this technique on my C11" with the hyperstar. Thanks for your input and initial help. Bruce
  15. umasscrew39

    Bruce Donzanti

    From my C11" EdgeHD - most with hyperstar (f/2) and some at prime (f/10) using a SX UltraStar C camera.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.