barbulo

OMG! Plate solving=new concept. Sounds good though. I’ve read the basics. Do I need any extra equipment?

Sorry for the misunderstanding. I meant polarscope. I understand that the star alignment will not improve the PA. I pretended to improve the PA to fix the poor accuracy after the star alignment. But no way. My workflow: Once the tripod is balanced I use the knobs to move Polaris to its place in the reticle, indicated both by an APP and the Synscan handset after the initialization process. Not in the center of the reticle. Then I perform the 2 or 3 star alignment. With the mount in the same position, the error displayed after the alignment is much higher when I chose the 3-star procedure (several degrees), while it’s “only” 20’-40’ when choosing 2-star. I use a computer and an ASI224 camera to exactly center the stars in the scope during the star alignment. I am not sure if the deviation is in RA and/or DEC but it’s quite high. I’ll check it the next time. With this lack of accuracy I can manually slew the scope to the selected objet if it is big enough (M42, M45, Mars). But it’s impossible with fainter objects: M36, M37... What I’ve detected is a deviation in the DEC axis while imaging DSOs. It’s an evident sign of poor PA, right? I’ll try different solutions during the next session. Thanks to all for your replays.

After polar and star alignment, the accuracy of the scope pointing at any object is very poor. I tried to improve it re-aligning. Since I’m not sure what the problem might be, I tried to polar align more accurately. But as I mentioned, the supposed position of Polaris in the finder scope is completely away and the mount doesn’t slew to targets accurately. An additional problem is that I have a very constrained field of view from my yard. Perhaps I shouldn’t focus too much in polar alignment. I don’t know. I could try a different location too.

Thank you @dannybgoode. All data correct. Polaris position double checked with other sources. Thank you @Owmuchonomy. Next time I’ll perform 2-star alignment and polar alignment iterations. Any recommendation when choosing the star for the polar alignment? Synscan offers Sirius firstly and Capella secondly.

Hi all! I am opening this post because I am not able to perform an accurate polar alignment. I balance the tripod, then I use the polar scope to perform an initial alignment and finally perform the 3-star alignment with the Synscan. Due to horizon limitations, I decided to chose Capella, Hamal and Procyon, following the manual advice: two stars on the same side of the meridian (RA dev >3h and DEC diff 10-30º) and one on the other side. However, the system shows a very poor accuracy after the process. If I chose 2-star alignment the error is <1º, but still high. Trying to fix it, I follow the Synscan Polar Alignment procedure, but then, the Polaris position in the polar scope goes far away from its supposed place. After a new 2/3-star alignment process, there is still a big error in the mount alignment. The polar scope is fairly calibrated. What can I do? Thanks in advance!

Welcome to SGL Andrzej!

I have the 150P and I really miss the dual speed focuser of the PDS. I use a home-made Bathinov mask but focusing is still a pain.

Welcome!

Welcome!

Hi there! This is my first "decent" picure of the M42, according to my standards (newbie). Gear: SW Explorer 150p + EQ3 GOTO + ZWO ASI224 + UHC filter. 110 x 15s subs. Only <20% valid 😢 Software: DSS + Fitswork + PS. Comments appreciated. Autosave001.fits

Bienvenido a SGL

I've found this post in the primers section: Though it doesn't mention any streaming site, I hope it helps you in some way.

WOW!

Hi Dave and welcome to SGL. I started with the same equipment that you have and then added the Synscan GOTO kit, the introscope and a planetary camera (ZWO ASI224MC). Still on my first steps.

Hi, hello and welcome!

Maybe frustrating session but worthy in the end. Beautiful picture!

With the 150p, but I think it would work fine with yours. Actually, the pds have better focuser the p.

I only have the 224 but I´m very happy with it. You can find it new for slightly above 200€.

Welcome to SGL

Thank you very much @michael.h.f.wilkinson for your advise. Your examples look awesome and are very stimulating to me.

Now it makes a bit more sense to me. However I am still a bit lost in the calibration frames processing procedure. Those frames I took go directly to the respective tab in PIPP or I have to create the masters. How?

Thank you @vlaiv and @michael.h.f.wilkinson Clear that I need calibration for planetary imaging. Clear that I need Darks, Flats and Flat Darks (I understand for both planetary and DSO). Clear that I can use PIPP for that purpose. I understand the settings explained by @vlaiv, but when I tried to decipher @michael.h.f.wilkinson's trick I got very confused. If I have to make the Flats based on the histogram, maintaining the same setting of the lights (included gain I suppose) and adjusting the exposure time, and then take the Flat Darks with that same settings, how could I take the Flat Darks first?

Hi everyone, I know this is recurrent topic but as it happened to many others, the more I read about, the more confused I am. What I (think I) know so far: My camera (ZWO ASI224MC) is designed for planetary image. However, I’ve read that it works fairly well with DSO. Image calibrating makes no sense for planetary imaging but does for DSO. Different types of cameras requires different calibration images sets. I’ve read about Darks, Flats, Bias and Flat-Dark. What I surely don’t know: What kind of calibration frames does my camera need? Do I need to introduce any software into my current workflow? For planetary I am using PIPP – Autostakkert – Registax – FITSwork – PS. Further question will arise after your kind and patient answers. Thanks in advance.

Welcome to SGL, Wout.

Welcome!