teoria_del_big_bang

Do you have a guide camera ?

As this thread goes on you are likely to get so many suggestions it may be a bit of overload. There has been some suggestions made maybe try to get a clear night try some of them and come back with an update. I think to eliminate possibility of star trailing or out of round stars causing an issue make sure all that works as we think it should, Firstly on a single frame centre of target image, then try same after moving the framing to one side. Slew to target Settle (2 secs) ensure it starts tracking check if guiding - I am not sure if NINA does or it is an option and really for this should not matter so long as it is tracking. take image plate solve if not in tolerance, determine the errors, reslew and run through sequence again Confirm all that works correctly and examine the 10 second images, are there no star trailing and reasonably round stars. That at least eliminates the fundamentals. Steve

That could be significant, there is a settle time somewhere in NINA that should at least be a couple of seconds but the fact it works with a single frame and not when you try to offset the framing in the framing wizard is very odd. I do not think the altitude will cause an issue I have had mine set wrong many times, although I am only at 180M anyway and many times it was set at zero. I wonder is it just the angle of rotation that is causing it to fail, maybe the rotation direction needs inverting (just a way out thought) but I l know when I fitted my auto rotator and it was wrong it just never worked, it kept tryung to rotate and centre but eventually gave up. I know you are manually rotating camera but I wonder if when setting to 2 frames whilst the angle has not been solved can cause an issue, Maybe try selecting a single frame in middle of image and slew till it is centred (but not rotated) then determine the rotation angle and rotate the camera till the anlge is correct, or in acceptable limits, and then change the framing or select two frame mosaic and try again. Steve

I am not sure if it is me misunderstanding things here but even without guiding and even some slight PA error 10 seconds should not give significant trailing after 10 seconds --- Should it, am I seeing this all wrong ? NINA should be enabling tracking (if not guiding) and that should be sufficient, if its not tracking then it would never work. Steve

Forgive me if I am misunderstanding. Just taking things step by step:- So forgetting the mosaic attempt for now. If you want to image a single framed target does it all work correctly, i.e. does it slew to target, take an image, plate solve, determine the error then slew slightly again and repeat that sequence, maybe several times until it centres the target within acceptable limits ? Steve

That needs checking it is tracking I guess as it certainly should be doing and I am not even sure there is an option to stop it tracking I thought that was just how NINA worked, there may be an option to stop it guiding, again unless I power my rig up not sure about that.

TBH that was my first thoughts, especially as NINA wil first slew to where it thinks the target should be and then enable tracking (not sure if it enables guiding or not) before taking the first image, but even tracking alone should not show any trailing with 10 seconds unless PA was way off. Steve

Well that surprises me that 10 seconds should cause an issue, I have it set at 8 seconds. Normally the mount will be tracking after the slew so even if guiding isn't enabled at 10 seconds with mount tracking there should not be much in the way of star trailing. But can't argue if @OK Apricot has seen the issue. If that does not cure it then maybe explain what you mean exactly by saying NINA has no idea what to do. I take it you move the fram about to get your desired framing and then click on "Slew and Centre" what exactly happens in NINA ? Steve

Regarding draping the cables you look to have a fair bundle of cables looping back to below the scope whereas I only have 2, the 12V supply to the UPB and one good quality USB3 cable. I route everything then to the UPB except the mount which goes direct to my PC as the power and USB connections do not move with the scope I find this a better solution. Although that should still not cause the issues you are having but I would keep any looping cables that move to a minimum. Then however many cables you have to get back to earth they need fixing at some point on the scope, but do not tie-wrap really tightly and maybe wrap something soft around the cables first, then use fairly wide tie-wrap (not thin ones that can curt into cables, or better a 3D printed clamp or similar. The leave a nice large loop of cables that will suffice for any position of the scope without any danger of getting trapped, and then secure the other end to the fixed part of the mount in a similar manner to how it was to the scope. The idea is that the only portion of cables to move is this loop and between the fixed points and the connectors they never move. Then to keep all cables in the loop neat and tidy use velcro wraps (not tie wraps) these are easy to remove if needed and they cannot gut into the cables or squash them. Steve

Regarding power distribution I am pretty much the same as yourself using the ultimate power pox and since getting rid of cheaper hubs AND using only Lindy USB cables same as @tooth_dr never had an issue at all. Looking at the image it looks a nice setup but what is all that tape or something wrapped around the power cable to the UPB ? Could that cable be giving you an issue ? Steve

I knew you would find a hole in the solution 🙂 , I guess it wouldnt work, it was just a quick thought off the top of my head and would probably only work if you returned the scope to be level and make that park position so you can easily send it there and then back after the rotation, so I guess you could get it to work but maybe not a nice solution 😞 Steve

Very nice, you can't get enough of a good thing and that is a great camera. Steve

What about a different approach: 3D print a clamp that fits around some diameter (could be a spacer), fit felt inside if worries about marking the diameter, that is flat on one side and can fit a metal strip to so you can put a magnetic clinometer on it, zero it and then rotate the desired amount of degrees, remove the clinometer and away you go. Clinometers are cheap and I think very accurate these days. Similar to This one Steve

Thats brilliant considering the LP you had. This is a target I am desperate to get but last couple attempts has been hampered by clouds so not done much in it yet. Steve

I have printed in 5 colours with my printer, but it does play up from time to time so not used it for a bit. Also agree with @vlaiv that trying to print 1 degree markers would make it pretty unreadable although with the right nozzle and extrusion width would be possible but would not recommend it and marks a say every 5 degrees with maybe a smaller one in between (making markers every 2.5 degrees) would be sufficient as even with 1 degree marks I do not think it would be accurate to that amount. You maybe better designing the ring and giving it to a professional company that can print in two colours, there are a few in UK but if you want draw your design and put on this thread it may give is a better idea if we know exactly what it is you are after. Steve

And for a proper workflow to get the utmost out of your data I would agree but when starting in PI the way @scotty38 suggests is a good way to start and like you say to see what is possible with the image. Steve

For the easiest method then that's spot on I think. Steve

Welcome to SGL 🙂 It may well be in stock at RVO (sorry FLO) https://www.rothervalleyoptics.co.uk/skywatcher-evolux-62ed-apochromatic-refractor-ota.html Or you could do some more research and get involved in SGL to learn a bit more about AP and then when you have had enough posts (genuine posts) you will be able to use the buy and sell section and often scopes around this focal length are up for sale so you could save some pennies. Steve

My word Olly, who knew software could be so much fun, amazing how busy you have been and great to see all these great fantastic images reprocessed 🙂 I would love to see a few more side by side images of the original and reprocessed (if you find the time 🤣 ) Steve

Totally agree, lovely images Steve

Thanks @ollypenrice that gives me some great advice and helps a lot 🙂 Steve

Is that starnet2 ? I would use Starnet2 not Starnet. EDIT: Ah just read the thread header again and you refer to Starnet++ so that's the same as Starnet2 so sorry wont bang on about that anymore 🙂 Not sure why the error, only time I can recall strange results is if I try to use the process on a linear image and not tick the checkbox to say linear image, or vica versa. Also I know there is a small cost to buy StarXTerminator, but it is not much and I have found this works best for most images I have tried so far compared to Starnet2. I think there is a trial period for StarXT so I would recommend at least giving it a go. Maybe Starnet2 will work better on some images, not sure but it is good to have both processes so you can at least try both and see if one yields better results than the other, it is worth the extra bit of processing time. Steve

And me 🙂 Never noticed that before but now I will see it everytime. Great image, as always Göran Steve

Do you think this initial stretch to get the stars correct will yield a different result to removing before the stretch and then individually stretching each image before some form of blend ? Although thinking about it now 🤔, maybe this is a better workflow if only for the fact you are stretching the image with the stars included and so get a better sense of what the final image is with regard to star size and brightness as you have the whole image to view in real time, where as an individual star stretch is just against a blank background., making it difficult to judge when you have it just right. So with that in mind I think I will adopt that kind of workflow. I too am still trying to in down a good workflow that works for me so just a couple of questions if that#s okay 🙂 If you had to do some work on the stars then, such as NB halo removal, or some form of sharpening would you do that on the stars only image (or could that yield some artefacts as the star size will change significantly between removal and the blend) or do that on the whole image before removal ? And I know you are very careful not to do too much regarding noise removal but if you do use it where in the workflow would you do this ? Steve

From what I read people seem to do it at slightly different stages, but the consensus seems to be very early on in the post processing, either just after the RGB combination, or maybe after a moderate stretch so the stars are visible but not overblown. Personally and doing it in PI I do it in the linear stage, shortly after RGB combination, having done some initial noise reduction and DBE before the RGB combination but before any stretching. You can do some searching on Google but probably there is no definitive answer to say you must do it at this precise stage, and I have done a bit of experimenting and so long as you do it early on I am not even sure it makes a difference. I am no expert on any of this and have searched as well to see when and how to do all this. I certainly would persevere with getting it (0r StarXTerminator) working in PI it would be so much easier. But to answer your last question The answer is basically yes but for me remove before the stretch - but that is not what everyone does. Steve