JonCarleton

OK...I have a really basic question that =must= be answered in the documentation for Carte du Ciel somewhere, though I cannot find it or perhaps cannot describe it properly enough to generate an answer. So, I'll try here: When I open up Carte du Ceil, there are these very large, circular, light blue "blobs" on the chart. 1) What the heck are these blobs? 2) Why are they there? 3) How do I make them go away? (which assumes they don't have a really good reason for showing up that I am too inexperienced to understand at this point) The wash out the background, making it difficult to see what is that section of the sky. At first, noting that one such blob was more or less centered around Jupiter, I suspected that it was trying to show the zone of excessive brightness due to Jupiter. Then, I found a similar blob around Mercury and decided that explanation was a bit of a stretch.

Stash_old==> Thanks, I'll look into CCDCIEL...though not the windows stuff. "I don't do Windows and I don't type on fruit." Wornish==> I have thoroughly tested and worked with Ekos, but had some issues with lockups and things that may be due to the odd collection of gear I have to operate For now, at least, other packages work better for me. Thanks for the mention, though. For many, Ekos is an excellent choice.

Thanks All! I really appreciate it. Sometimes it is easier to ask folks in the same venue than Google. Google often sends me on long goose chases. ...and for the record....I don't mind paying for software...but I'm an old UNIX guy and just don't care for "Windoze."

I have tried Stellarium. It points OK, but I really need to look at how it will sync to known coordinates. That's a TODO...thanks. CarteDuCiel is something I haven't looked at yet. Another TODO.

I am looking for suggestions for Linux-based pointing software that will accept coordinates for sync manually or from Astrometry.net other than Ekos. I like the way AstroPhotoPlus works, but can't get it to run on a Pi4. I am currently running PHD2 for guiding, Astrometry.net (local command line) for plate-solving, my own Java DIY package for focusing (all of these with indi drivers) and AstroDMx_Capture for imaging. I could close the loop if I just could find a pointing package that would accept coordinates for sync. Ekos is an obvious choice, but I don't care for the way it operates and I have had many issues with it in my recent attempts at integration. Hopefully, there is something else out there I just haven't found yet. Lots of stuff for Windows, but "I don't do Windows," nor does the Pi without pain and suffering. I was reasonably pleased with AstroPhotoPlus, but can't get it to run on a Pi4 and support requests seem to be a very long-term process by design.

Sombrero galaxy has been a tough one for me. I wish I could get one half as clear as that. Last one I took, one could barely see the dark border. Perhaps I'll try again this season.

One of the keys to astro-photography these days is stacking. That is, taking loads of images and combining them with stacking software (eg: Deep Sky Stacker (Windows) or Siril (Linux)) to improve the resolution and density of your images. Stacking software aligns your images and will even allow you to collect images from multiple night sessions on a single target and combine into a single dense image. Why take multiple images instead of one long time-lapse? Imagine a two hour time-lapse that had 2 airplanes, 5 satellites and an owl fly through the field of view. Or perhaps the wind or a glitch in the mount caused some camera shake or clouds invaded during part of the exposure. Or, or, or...Two hours wasted. If you take 2 hours of exposures in smaller bits (eg: 5 minutes, or less...or more depending upon the mount) you can eliminate any bad images prior to stacking and still get excellent results...and add more to the stack another night. Once you have a good final image from stacking what will will amount to many minutes or even hours of data, then post processing is next. There is a process called "stretching" the image that makes the view of a mundane, but dense, well-stacked image, absolutely spectacular. This can be done in Photoshop (Windows) or GIMP (Linux) or in other specialized software that will have specialty image tweaking functionality, such as camera noise-reduction and other useful options. Much of this software is available as freeware/donationware and all of it has a learning curve. But it is well worth the time and effort to learn. Collecting multiple images underscores the need for the reliability of your mount. Collecting data on multiple nights requires precision pointing. To that end, there is a process called plate solving. The simplest, (but possibly slowest) method is to take an image, upload it to nova.astrometry.net and wait for the results (up to 10 minutes). It will tell you the -exact- coordinates of the image, allowing you to make adjustments as required. You can also download the astrometry data and software and run it locally with speedy results, but that process is beyond the scope of my intent here.

Presently, I use AstroDMx_Capture for my imaging (I got started with it when it was the ONLY Linux program that supported the SVBONY305 camera), Siril for my stacking, My own Java panel for my focusing using the indi_wmh_focuser driver and I am still looking at plate solving and guiding. I use indi drivers for many things, but not Ekos so very much. It is a workflow thing with me and I do admit that my own ideas for workflow may be warped and even wrong at some levels. Astroberry is a very excellent package. If you are pleased with it, I'd say stick with it. The support is excellent and it is ever-evolving. To answer your question more directly, I like the way AstroDMx_Capture works and generally prefer separate programs for separate functions over all-in-one solutions. With respect specifically to AstroDMx_Capture, I like the way the color balance works with the real time display, and the way the control panel works for exposure, gain and other items. It is also remarkably easy to switch from AVI capture to FITS or TIFF for different targets or in the middle of a target sequence.

I got a note from AstroDMx_Capture this morning about a new release of their software (version 0.78.3). The primary changes include 32 bit and 64 bit support for the Raspberry Pi and especially for the SVBONY305 camera using the new SDK from SVBONY. This is my primary imaging software, as I run Linux on both my Pi scope driving computer and laptop, so I am quite pleased. .3) ()version (0.7

True to form, I missed again and still got an image. I really am going to have to sit down and get good at plate solving. This time I was aiming for the Trifid Nebula and ended up with the Lagoon. I eventually did find the Trifid and have also included my reshoot of the Dumbbell Nebula that was my original mistake ( I was aiming for the Angelfish Cluster). All of these are from my Skywatcher 250P/Synscan with a SVBONY 305 camera using AstroDMx_Capture. 200 subs @ 8 seconds/25% gain, 30 darks, no flats or bias. Stacked with Siril, finished with StarTools and Gimp...mostly Gimp, as I am still stumbling along with StarTools. I should also mention that of the 200 subs in each image, I had to eliminate as few as 15 in a batch and as many as 32 resulting from inopportune scope tracking (SynScan).

That galaxy is pretty large, but the Skywatcher 250P (254mm X 1200mm) with the SVBony305 has a very tight FOV. I struggle with that for really large objects, such as Andromeda Galaxy. I have tried a .5 reducer, but it causes focus issues and probably needs an extension tube. There was a bit of cropping for drift between frames, but not much. I'd say less than 5%. I did shave a bit off the left side for centering, but again, very minimal. I also bined X4 the entire image, but that would not increase the "fill" of the galaxy in the frame. Thank you for your kind comments.

I finally got around to processing some of the stuff I have been shooting. Here's a whirlpool galaxy: Image captured as 100, 1.5 second @ 50% gain subs with the SVBONY305 and AstroDMx_Capture software. Processed with Siril (stacking), StarTools (image clean-up, color balance), then GIMP (sizing and cropping) all in Linux. Darks, Bias & Flats were not used. Scope was a SkyWatcher 250P with Synscan, however, tracking was done with INDI indi_skywatcherAltAzMount driver and no guide scope. Synscan GOTO was not used.

Looking good! You have come a long way in a very short time. You will find that some of the options in Siril work better for some types of images and other options for other types. It is a very powerful tool, but it takes some messing about with to get your legs under you. Then too, most of the image software is like that. I'm trying to wrap my head around StarTools myself....been using GIMP, and it is OK, but there are things I do in multiple steps that other programs make a single-step. Good job getting rid of the noise!

A few things I noticed: The focus was a bit out, and the tracking was slipping, frame to frame and there was a lot of noise at varying levels frame to frame, including some light from a source at the lower left of each frame. These are things that make it a bit more difficult and can be corrected with effort and practice. Several frames had to be excluded in the selection process, including one frame with a satellite trace across the frame. Sometimes satellite traces will "stack out, " but sometimes not. I generally exclude them. This was my Siril recipe (note that I had to exclude about 1/3 of the frames to get a good stack): File Conversion Tab Change directory Add images Sequence name: M51 [Convert] Sequence Tab Sequence export (check Normalize images) FITS (default) [Export sequence] Pre-processing Tab Skip Registration Tab Global Star Alignment (deep sky) Algorithm: Bicubic Check Match stars in selection Check Simplified Drizzle x2 [Go register] I noticed that the sequence created by the registration had some wacky results due to excessive drift in your tracking. I had to go back and exclude those images and re-register. Plot Tab Skip Stacking Tab Stacking Methods: Average stacking with rejection Normalizaton: Additive with scaling Uncheck Force recomputing Check Normilize to 16-bit Rejection: Linear Fit Clipping change [all] to [selected] (too few images to eleminate any now) [Start stacking] The thing that would have made the most difference in this photo would have been the addition of some dark frames and bias frames to get rid of the noise. Many more frames would have been good too. Someone with greater skills than I certainly can do a much better job than this, but in the end, the greatest improvements will be (in order): Focus, Darks & Bias, Tracking and More Images. Much better than My first attempt at M51, however.

When you do the initial load of the images and convert to FITS, two viewers pop up, a composite RGB and a monochrome view from which you can select red, green or blue. What do your images look like in the FITS viewers? As an alternative, you could zip together some of your images and upload them here to let someone else take a whack at the stack. Also, .JPG/.JPEG is not a great format for images. Use FITS, TIFF or something else for your capture. You lose a lot with .jpg compression....it is ok for the final image, and great for posting on the web, but not much good for other uses. Or, at least, not as good as some other options.

I use Siril, but I didn't like it at first. There's a learning curve, but one you figure out what it wants, it works very well.

I have a SV105. Best to set it at 1080p (1920x1080). That way, if you scale down the image, say, to 640, you get a much sharper image. I have gotten some really good results with the 105, that I demoted to guide scope after I got the 305. Looking at the image of Jupiter you show, It looks to me like you stacked it without doing a registration in your stacking program, making the stacked images not completely lined up. This is my first moon shot with the SV105, shot at 1920x1080 and reduced to 640:

I've been doing a lot of beta testing with software of late, ever trying to optimize my setup and help where I can as new "stuff" is available. Lots of good stuff, but alas, all the reconfiguration and adaptations has my setup in a bit of disarray. Last night, we had one of the first really clear nights we have had in recent memory. So, let's put the scope outside and brave the mosquitoes! Maybe grab a few Messier objects we haven't managed yet.... Well, not so much. Some of the new tracking software betas didn't exactly hold tracking without a guide scope (I really have to start using one). I switched to another "stable" version, and had similar luck, so I undid everything and went back to the Android Tablet driving SynScan. Depending on where you are looking, drift can be a problem, but it can usually find a deep sky object with a decent alignment. Well again, not so much. It was getting late and we still didn't have an image, so we opted for the Anglefish Globular Cluster, as it was in a good spot and fairly bright. Only a real dumbbell could mess that up, right? I did manage to find a smudgy gray image in the finder scope, not quite where I though it should be, but close. When I realized what it was, I had to take a few pictures. Drift was pretty bad on the mount driven by Synscan, so I couldn't get long exposures. I didn't even bother to get darks because I knew that it wouldn't stack well. The lesson here is, don't be a dumbbell! If your stuff is working, don't mess with it!

I have been doing some beta testing with my SV305 and new drivers. Still a bit unsteady as I move forward into the dark. I thought this was fair for a first attempt. I was pleased to get the shadow of one of the moons (just about 2 o'clock from center as a blueish area).

I usually shoot 10 second exposures, but I get lots and lots and lots of subs. While I do recognize that 100 10 second subs does not equal 10 10 minute subs, it probably comes close to half the light of a long exposure collection. After stacking, I get pretty good light density....and all but eliminate the shortcomings of my Alt/Az tracking.

It has been a while since I worked on instruments. To make an -actual- living, I left the music business and did software development some years ago. Although, I still perform a bit, though on pedal steel. Pedal steel players not only "get" to sit down during a gig, they "must" sit down. My second choice would be Bass sax. At least most of them have wheels.

I spend the first 20 years or so of my working life repairing musical instruments....can't even say how many saxophones I have overhauled. Everything from sopraninos to bass.

Synscan has two or three tracking modes. Make sure you change to LUNAR from SIDEREAL tracking for moon shots. Tracking still isn't going to be perfect on an Alt/Az mount, but it will be better with the right tracking. Stacking may help, but that looks like simple focus. It is normal for a camera to have a different focus point from a given optical lens. However, if you cannot focus your camera somewhere between full focus-in to full focus-out, you may need an extension tube to move the camera farther out (always assuming the camera and telescope are a proper match and don't require some wacky adapter to begin with). While it is normal for atmospherics to mess with moon clarity, you should be able to get a crisper image than the one shown.

I found some ASTAP videos on Youtube. From a cursory examination, I'd say that while it does stacking that would be acceptable for astrophotography, its primary focus is as an annotation and research tool. It has loads of features for identifying comets, asteroids and other objects and allows one to ignore the whole image stacking and stack single moving objects (such as a comet), relegating the stars, galaxies and such to star trails. If I have it right, its primary stacking method is to plate solve each image, rather than seeking pixel patterns. Apparently, it then uses pixel patterns for the target in the images and combines the plate solve coordinates with the target coordinates for its selective stacking. Very cool, and useful for research, but not particularly optimal for artwork. I may keep it in the toolbox for its annotation abilities, but I don't think its a good fit for artful attempts.

Anyone using ASTAP for stacking? I installed it to take a look. Good feature set, but the UI isn't exactly self-explanatory. I'm wondering now if it worth the time to explore. I mean, I'd have to read instructions and stuff just to get a start.