Gary1968's Saturn

[Kaptain Klevtsov]

After Gary had loads and loads of issues with getting the file to load in Registax, he stuck it on Grant's website (via snail mailing the DVD) and sent me a pointer to it.

Very big issues with the file as VD didn't like it at first, Registax barfed at it and allsorts. The AVI is 1280 X 960 (how did you do that Gary?) and so it takes up loads of memory. The bit in the middle with Saturn on is very small (you need to get a Barlow Gary to make the useful bit bigger) but I finally managed to get something from it.

I must say that the focus was spot on when the seeing was good and tracking kept the target in position really well.

A good result Gary, just use more of the frame and don't make 'em too big next time.

Captain Chaos

[GazOC]

Very big issues with the file as VD didn't like it at first, Registax barfed at it and allsorts. The AVI is 1280 X 960 (how did you do that Gary?) and so it takes up loads of memory.

Was the camera a Logitech Fusion? If so, get Open Capture rather than K3CCD and use Huffy lossless compression to get the max FPS. I've been playing with the camera for a while after I found one cheap on Ebay, its a USB 2, 1.3 megapixel camera but with only a (larger than the Toucam) CMOS sensor, you can get some great FPS numbers out of it but the images seem to be a bit noisy.

I believe it can also do 10 sec LE exposures from software. It would make a good, cheap guider if this is true.

[russ]

Very big issues with the file as VD didn't like it at first, Registax barfed at it and allsorts. The AVI is 1280 X 960 (how did you do that Gary?) and so it takes up loads of memory.

Microsoft's new VX6000 webcam also runs at that resolution on USB2.0 high speed. Has a 1/2" CMOS sensor, not sure if it's the same as the Fusion or not? Be great if they could get these CMOS sensors working as well as the Sony CCD. Especially for deepsky, what a difference a 1/2" chip would make.

Nice image of Saturn btw

Russ

[gary1968]

Thanks for processing the image C.C., thats much better than I managed.

The 1260 x 960 resolution of the image is the max resolution of my Orion camera, it recomends in the cameras manual that this setting be used.

C.C., do you think I should reduce the resolution to, if memory serves, 800 x 600? BTW the cameras got a 1/2" Sony CCD!

The image was taken using an Antares 2x barlow, which at the mo is all I have. A 3x barlow will be bought shortly. I am hoping that if the 3x is not enough then the 2x and 3x stacked together will get the desired result.

Thanks for all the feed back guys,

Gary

[Kaptain Klevtsov]

gary, the biggest issue was that out of each frame, the actual fun bit was a tiny fraction, so you have to process loads of black to get at the stuff you want. The resolution thing is a great thing for lunar as you will almost always fill the frame with your target so its going to be an ace lunar camera. You need to get much more up close and personal which means more magnification, but that drops off the light levels as well. If you stack too many Barlow lenses you spread out the light so thinly that you don't get a bright enough image, so its better to go for a small chip camera like a Toucam and use more of the pixels for the target. If you drop your current camera down to a lower resolution I expect that you will get the same problem but with less information to process. You will probably get the same image scale but the good bit will have lower resolution. If you can do sub-frame imaging with that camera you will get better results because the file size will be more manageable.

The 1/2" CCD size sounds like a big chip for planetary and might suit a whopper like a 12" or maybe a 10" aperture SCT where there is enough light being captured to allow big magnifications, but for a more modest setup you will be struggling to scope up enough photons to illuminate such a big chip. A toucam with a 12" Newt. plus a 4X imagemate can barely get enough light and magnification to half fill the frame so it depends on the sensitivity of your camera.

HTH

Captain Chaos

[lunator]

Gary

Registax won't load the AVI there is a piece of software that will convert it to a type of AVI that regitax will read.

http://www.virtualdub.org/

Just open the AVI in Virtualdub and save it as an old AVI (Shift F7)

I hope this helps

Cheers

ian

[Kaptain Klevtsov]

Ian, Virtualdub didn't like it at all. My first post mentioned VD, I should have been more accurate and used the full name. There was something inherently bad about the AVI as none of my nice programs would touch it at first. I ended up by loading it into Vitrualdub and chopping bits off it and "save as"ing it before it even showed an image. That way it saved it before having done whatever processing it likes to do first, which, if I let it do it, crashed the program. After chopping 25% ish off the back end it then stopped crashing stuff, but was still humongeously big.

Captain Chaos

[lunator]

CC

Sorry mate, I didn't register the shorthand.

If virtualdub didn't like it then something was definately wrong.

It does sound like the size of the file was part of the issue.

What was the orignal file size?

Cheers

Ian

[Kaptain Klevtsov]

Just shy of 3GB, so a bit on the big size. I had to knock it down to around 2GB before I could do anything at all with it. That might be my hardware though as it's not cutting edge stuff by any means.

Captain Chaos

[gary1968]

Howdy,

You mention C.C. that the file was a little under 3Gb, :shock: :shock:

When I burnt the file to DVD the file size was 1.2Gb, approx. Am I right then to assume that my camera produces a compressed file and programs like VD and Registax have to uncompress it before they can deal with it?

I did manage to get VD to load the file, I then chopped a bit off as Registax wasn't happy with it, I assumed that was a lack of RAM in my pooter. After that Registax was happy and I processed the image at the link below:-

The filed named saturn 120307 2a.jpg is the best I have managed with that avi.

http://www.photobox.co.uk/album/5237236

I think I have kicked the a**e well and truely out of that one, just have to wait now till conditions are right to get more images.

Might keep that camera for Lunar imaging as you suggested C.C. and get a Toucam for planetary stuff, ssssshhhhhhhhhh, don't tell the wife

Cheers,

Gary