AlexK

As far as I recall you have one more (different) code on (or in) the box. I believe that's what they might ask to confirm you are the product owner. Email registration is a good security anchor as well. But the email may change too.

That's simple. On activation, the app establishing a link to their server, confirm the code is legit and uses counter on it is not maxed out yet, increment the use counter on the server, enable the app. That's the cheapest way for Celestron (instead of paying Google for their Playstore full-fledged auth service AND to have the app enabled without the Internet connection needed any time in the future). The primary drawback is in the fact that this is a single use code. So if you will ever have to reset/reflash that smart you will have to enter the code again and trip the counter. That's why you have 5 attempts for that code. Use them wisely.

Congrats, Mark!

Very interesting. I'm indeed surprised it worked on the GEM. As I have already mentioned above, it was consistently failing on the Ballscope when the phone was at some significant slant to the horizon sideways. If you are sure it was not just a smallish slant (e.g. the target is close to the meridian where the GEM motions are equal to an Alt/Az mount in general), that could mean the success might depend on the phone model, as indeed the Samsung Galaxy Note 10 is frankly the second best smartphone on this planet (after Note 20) with top accelerometer and gyros sensors used for the seamless 3DVR HMD applications experience (virtual reality head mount display called Samsung Gear VR). Please, experiment more with that, like try it completely upside down. As that would mean a lot for the venerable ball scope owners (the inventor of the ball scope mount Pierre Lemay, for example, has abandoned this idea as CSSE doesn't work with his iPhone at any significant slant).

Correct. The CSSE alignment routine is asking you to point the scope manually to some distant target, and then move the cross on the phone screen, showing the view from the camera, with your finger to accurately mark that target on the image. No Plate Solving (PS) happening yet. Just marking of the camera image spot corresponding to the center of view of your telescope. So it can be done daytime if you sure that until the night the camera alignment wouldn't shift accidentally. At night, when you point your scope into the sky and command to help finding your observing target, the image is taken, and the PS algorithm figure where the camera is pointing in the sky. Based on that initial alignment session the app will know where the telescope is actually pointing on that image too. So it can calculate the needed angles set (dA, dZ) to make that point coincident with your observing target and provide you with the directions how to move the OTA in order to get closer to your target (will show the arrow on the screen). Smartphone accelerometers sensors are used to track your progress and display it on the screen for the simple visual feedback loop (it's not the real image anymore, just the simulation on the star chart app screen driven by accelerometers sensors). When accelerometers are confirming to the algorithm that your telescope is close enough to that (dA dZ) shift (accelerometers are quite good at taking the angles change, contrary to absolute angles measurements involving the magnetometer), then the second PS is performed to confirm the scope is perfectly on target. If not, the sequence repeats. That sequential approximation of needed adjustments is the key to the CSSE success on otherwise imperfect and non-uniform (on different phones) sensors, the camera included. The alignment with the target in the very corner of the screen might work, however, the additional factor of the camera optics distortions at play there might reduce the accuracy or reliability/timing of pointing. Ideally it should be in the center of the camera frame to minimize any optical issue a particular smartphone might have.

I'm always carefully researching the weather pattern a week or two ahead of time as my car trips to dark LPZ (light pollution zones) take 5-8 hours and I'm going only once a month on a New Moon. As I have 5 preferred observing locations around my home (4 in California, 1 in Nevada) I can almost always follow the weather on the New Moon weekend into the most promising direction. Only 4 times in almost 20 years I had major issues, which could potentially ruin my night and were tempting to leave: Once I forgot to check local fires and been heading into the heavily smoked area, but as I'm always connected, when spotted the huge plume on the horizon ahead, I've stopped and been able to adjust my route. So in 2 hours of extra driving got to a decent sky location a bit to the side form the original target. Another time I've been researching the new dark location where I got a night breeze driving the moisture from a nearby lake which created an enormous dewing conditions (the water was swirling on the lower third of the 12" Dob OTA with distinct sound). Just packed quick (thanks to my cradle system) and in an hour already been setting up on the other side from it dry and cozy. Once, during unusually cold January, I've ended up on the top of a kilometer high hill in a horrid windchill, so even my multi layered outfit, including the full skiing suit with balaclava) started failing on me. But the sky was decent as usual and in the car I had the emergency PVC storm-suit, and hand/feet warmers. That fixed the problem even though was quite restrictive to my pointing/observing flow. Another time it was a major star party and 3 first nights out of 7 we had rain, so no way to fix that, but as I had the full scope cover I've been able to use every hole in the scattering clouds between pouring, and finally it cleared creating extremely transparent sky. So, just be prepared and mobile.

Celestron is monitoring many astronomy forums for feedback and ideas (unofficially). I've been talking with their software lead in charge for the CSSE app on one of them. He has confessed (between lines of course) that they are not planning a standalone app release any time soon. So their plan is to force us into buying crappy scopes as the temptation momentum is high enough. They even have a procedure to disable at some point those cheaters buying and reselling these scopes to obtain the code, and to re-enable legit owners. Mark. No alternatives means larger sales for these telescopes. If the margin for an app would be $10 and it's $20 for the bundle it's a nobrainer marketing decision. Such a struggling company as Celestron would go all in even for less having this monopoly. The number of CSSE DIY adapters in the wild (f.w.i.w. on 3 forums) is about a dozen and they are all covered with the cheapest CSSE scope model already $200 is not breaking a bank actually if the plan is to cut a corner or two on constellations learning time. And Celestron is already in the trap, they can't sell the standalone solution for $100 for example, as that kinda too much considering that for $100 more you can get it with the telescope, eyepieces, tripod, fork, red dot Yes, the CSSE is definitely the best celestial pointing aid for under a grand, but I'm personally, for example, can beat it on multiple bases with Telrad or better yet QuInsight any time. So not really looking forward to shell out ~$100 for a standalone option. $40 - maybe, but Celestron is not interested either no doubt.

Maybe just look around there first. There are plenty of examples how to ask a question to get it registered and answered. I'm using that forum for eons (but mostly for Android Java, my C# years time is well in the distant past).

Programming lessons on the Astronomy forum? That's... at least inefficient... I would recommend stackoverflow.com instead, And https://stackoverflow.com/questions/tagged/c%23 in particular for C# I can assure you, you'll find more than just 2 folks coding in C# there

That's so naive 😇 (no offence). Celestron is selling it bundled-only exactly to improve their profit on this tech. The figure of the investment into the app development and support divided by the number of users willing to DIY a properly working phone cradle is much more than an average amateur will be willing to pay for the basic planetarium app (you can find a much better planetarium/star charting app for free). Their marketing department has figured that offering a new product line (CSSE telescopes) targeting a specific market niche instead of a primitive accessory and a basic functionality app would be the best way to monetize on the open source Plate Solving tech which can be hijacked by a competitor any moment now (and that's our best hope, not the Celestron's charity). They wouldn't ever consider undermining their profits from these cheap to make telescopes by selling the bare app until they sell all what they have calculated have to be sold to cover the expenses and then some to please their investors (several years easily). Because the app allows to bump the price of these very cheap telescopes, which probably nobody would ever buy for that price if at all. Bare capitalism. 🤑 Surely, seasoned amateurs have already figured the true value of that new line, but Celestron doesn't actually hide the fact that this line is dedicated for the very beginners who yet to learn constellations, so can't reliably point any telescope to anything but the Moon (some can't), can't see the price of a GoTo system attractive yet or not willing to learn its technical complexities, and might have no idea yet what a good telescope actually is... 🤔

We have once figured, that the absolute maximum accuracy of the CSSE pointing with a modern smartphone is about 1 arcmin. Which corresponds to 1.2 km GPS/GLONASS error at London latitude. So, I wouldn't even bother striving for a sub-kilometer fix. Also, I wouldn't trust Russian GLONASS much (GNSS displayed in the top left corner of your app) as their satellite group is known for systematic malfunctioning.

Oh my! Don't do that, please. Your Dobson will became a "finger spinner" toy, totally ruining the experience. Just disassemble the base and see what's wrong. Usually that's just dirt. The only thing the Dobson mount has in common with the fork mount is the look. In fact, it's just a stand for the OTA helping to reposition it at various angles. Any ball bearings addition would convert that ingenious super sturdy mount into a flymsy wooden fork.

But why you want to sacrifice the aperture? You could instead try to outfit your 10" for your grab and go flow if you feel fit to haul it or see a way to roll it there. I did just that for my Zhumell 12" full OTA and my flow, which involves moving it from the apartment on 10th floor to the elevator to the 15th floor and then out to the 17th floor rooftop (three staircases to traverse). Utilized a yoga mat, two climbing rope rings for handles, flat furniture dolly, and a folding step stool to make that a piece of cake. In fact, for the dark sky trip I have even more elaborate transportation system (Part I, Part II, Part III) making it just a bit more time consuming. E.g. I know folks going out on foot with their OTA and slimline DIY base in the dedicated long backpack. Actually a Dob is much easier to grab and go as the setup is much simpler compared to any refractor but really tiny ones: just plop down the base and then OTA over it. No tripods and mount heads to fiddle around. All what's missing in stock Dobson designs for that are comfortable OTA handles.

Just don't run the car while it's powering the scope. It's totally safe if your cable and all connectors are of a good weather and abuse resistant breed. To amend the overdrain always keep in the car a well charged jumpstart battery. Another option would be to get a low voltage battery shut off controller. Finally, check also this discussion:

One of the options would be to ditch these dead boards and the SynScan controller altogether, and opt for a DIY EQMod Ascom system design, which will drive your mount's motors directly from a computer (just google for these words for more details). Surely, depends on your DIY potential.

Nice design! You almost have my own idea on that implemented (but my eyepiece is on the other side already). If you now just move the cradle to the eyepiece side and more forward (as much as you need to clear the headspace) you could use the CSSE from the eyepiece sitting position by just turning your head right to look at the phone. I'm using my QuInsight that way. Very convenient as soon as you can counterbalance this rig (looks heavy). Also, make sure that ballhead holds strong. Not all ball heads are made equal.

The monopod with the camera head is not very convenient with binos. But you can fix both issues adding a long enough piece to the head's screw. That way you will have the length increased to your liking and also have a section bending towards you so you can stand closer to the tripod with the chest bending back when observing at high altitudes. A piece of pipe with plugs, or just an L-shape with drilled bent ends would do the trick just fine (the latter can be used to DIY a similar single-axis bino mount as Ruud has described).

I doubt it. Too little use. So either get a fits viewer with the integrated browser (e.g: https://astroshed.com/fits4win/fits4win2doc.htm) or run your own web server and use a folder list wrapper which would extract the header and data section for you into some form. E.g. following this: https://mvolo.com/get-nice-looking-directory-listings-for-your-iis-website-with-directorylistingmodule/ (the latter would allow you to customize the data extracted and displayed exactly to your needs).

Mark. The prism effect you are having caused by the wide angle of the camera FOV. If you raytrace the edge of the incoming FOV cone you will see that it's forced to pass the prism at the "spectroscopy" angle 🌈. I.o.w. refracting it. So that's actually the vignetting. The curved edge you see is the "rooftop" of the prism. With the mirror you will see the back of the phone. In a telescope the FOV convergence is a rather small angle, thus no such situation possible.

Wish you good luck with the sky, Dave! I'm eager to hear your findings on a GEM. Tests I'm referring to were done on a Ball scope. In a nutshell, as soon as the phone screen looks too much to the side it's refusing to proceed with the pointing. I guess that's because their accelerometers data fusing has an angle restriction or has a check of the gravity vector to be in some indirect sync with what the camera shows for a given geolocation. Totally avoidable (in the algebra involved), but we cannot possibly know Celestron's rationale behind that (from a programmer's negligence all the way to preventing the widespread cradle hijacking 😎 ). Re 3D printer: The tech is super-mainstream by now. You can have a decent tool in your man's cave for just $200 shipped. Given the well known UK/EU prices on trivial astro gear "issue" that cost will be recovered in no time.

That all makes sense indeed. I wonder what would be the minimal usable FOV? As a prism is what I had in mind for that design myself initially but then saw like 80% of FOV obstructed with it in front of the cam. That would allow to design a very compact cradle which is easier to install on the OTA conveniently and without making a snag hazard. On a side note: I'm using the smartphone star chart extensively with the phone mounted close at the eyepiece so I would prefer the CSSE mounted at the same location too. Sadly, folks have already discovered that CSSE doesn't work at awkward angles, only with the phone X axis (left to right) horizontal. So a special shoe will be required to hold it near the EP like that (I have a design for that too, but want to refine it to be interchangeable with my QuInsight shoe). That's another reason I prefer to wait for a competitor app or for the Celestron improving upon its creation so folks with EQ and Ball mounts could benefit from it too. And a little tip about the clouds and other "sky devils" : If you make your cradle a bit movable around the field, then you should be able to re-calibrate it pointing into slightly different direction as needed to catch more stars and less obstructions (it should work being pointed in an arbitrary direction as soon as you can still register the alignment star/terrestrial object within the camera FOV; e.g. closer to a certain corner of the screen). That needs experimenting though, especially with DIY beam folders, as optical defects of the camera and reflection along with vignetting might increase the image errors in a way Celestron programmers have never anticipated in their algorithms tolerances.

The best way to design that beam folder is to model it in 3D CAD software (there are plenty of free options). Myself, I've been tinkering with that idea for my Galaxy S8 and a 10x10cm first surface mirror I've got off eBay for like $5): The yellow pyramid is the video frame FOV (quite wide 90 deg diagonally) of the main camera, the blue one is its reflection from the mirror (generated automatically as you move the mirror). Everything in the model is parameterized and snapped together, so you can change the angle of the mirror assembly and move it relatively to the camera chip location along two axes to see how the reflected FOV cone changes/behaves. My primary conclusions: The closer the mirror's edge to the camera the wider the FOV it is covering (kinda obvious for the Z axis, but it also important to move the edge by X axis (along the phone). The best mirror angle (for my camera) providing maximal unobstructed FOV is 54 degrees from the sensor's plane. A lot depends on the camera location in the phone body, as the primary obstruction you have to deal with is the back panel of the phone from the camera center to the top edge. Even a 10cm mirror is too short to cover the entire camera FOV (depends on the phone model). So the wingetting is unavoidable. But looking at the above projects, it seems like the SSE software is quite tolerant to vignetting. The first surface mirror is still beneficial as in any optical application. Looking at the sharp angle it has to use at the edge of the camera FOV it is obvious that the regular mirror will introduce plenty of distortions as the glass thickness for the light to traverse is changing from its center to the edge. But again, SSE plate solving software could be tolerant enough to that as well. However, I would expect it to be "stressed" by all of the above, possibly enough to have the pointing less accurate or/and taking more time or/and losing the alignment more often than usual. I'm not pulling the trigger on a SSE yet as I'm 100% satisfied with the accuracy of pointing with the QuInsight device at the moment. But already designing the minimalist phone cradle (pictured above the glove-tight-fit phone case and the temporary mirror holder for experimenting with the mirror position and angle) to 3D print for my field smartphone as soon as we finally get the standalone CSSE (or a competitor) product.

I can elaborate to reduce your confusion (no offence just for education). It's clearly out of focus. Mars is not a good focusing target. Get a Bahtinov mask to find the true focus imaging shifted star beams and adjusting to perfection in the center or halfway to the edge. Then use a piece of tape to fix focus and zoom physically. You haven't stated what lens you've got, but many can have the focus/zoom drift just from the gravity when pointed upwards like that (~40 deg per your image). Again, no clue what your lens is, but it looks like it's sitting in the body at a slant or the camera/lens has a defect causing your stars focused differently across the frame. The former is most probable, because the focus gradient is mostly vertical (in combination with the SA center shifted down, which is the top of the camera ), that's common for older type heavy lenses pointed that low (~45 deg). Possibly on the cheap adapter (e.g. a Nikon lens in a Canon body). But some stock lenses might have a collimation issue like that too. So I would research what's at fault here. Your unknown lens has a serious coma and/or astigmatism (could be the above collimation/installation flaw). To reduce that you should close the diaphragm 1-2 notches (depends on the lens). The lens is either dirty, or a bit foggy, or has a scratch(es). The glare patterns from Mars reveal that. Remove the filter and/or clean the optics. The video looks overprocessed by dumb camera CPU algorithms. For better results you should shoot in RAW and use batch processing to convert to video frames. Maybe even with stacking in between (you haven't stated what was your exposure, prob around 5 sec, so even the HDR could be possible). All of the above is making your work a piece of art due to revealing all these "behind the scene" factors. Making it less a videographing of sky wonders but more of your personal circumstances and effort amusing an observant viewer's imagination 🙃

I like its artistic representation of deficiencies in the camera setup. It gives it life.

"MAG" field is actually for the scope magnification, not for the planet's visual magnitude