Jump to content

Banner.jpg.b83b14cd4142fe10848741bb2a14c66b.jpg

L IR GB imaging


Recommended Posts

HI All

My main imaging skills are in Lunar and planetary work.

I have now advanced to tri colour/line imaging for certain targets.

I already use a 670 nm IR pass filter for L data but i am looking to go into the deep red wavelength.

My query is this,

Can i replace my red filter for an IR filter 742nm or 807nm?

Will this give me a red image data on all targets or is it best for

the moon and mars only?

Thanks in advance

Ed Sampson

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've got no idea Ed., but it sounds interesting. I don't get quite what you mean though, as you say you use an IR for the Lum. layer already. Are you suggesting a more severe (if that's the correct term) IR filter so you end up with IR, IR++, G and B in place of LRGB, or have I misread the post? I'd think the IR++ might be better as a Lum. filter and the "normal" IR instead of the red might be more suitable for normal looking images, but I don't know what you're trying to acheive.

Kaptain Klevtsov

Link to comment
Share on other sites

OK to clear up my original post.

(this is for advanced planetary imaging)

Using 680nm IR pass for luminance helps with atmosphere distortion.

A more severe filter in the IR (742 or 847nm) produces a very red/Sharper image.

Now will this shift into the infra red be an ideal replacement for a normal Red

filter or does it only improve the moon and mars as targets?

(or does it all make no sense!!!!) :(

Regards

Ed

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi Ed

I've got the 802 lp filter and it really steadies the image down in marginal seeing. I've used it on Venus and also the Jupiter shots I posted on here in the planetary section. The trouble is it blocks out a lot of light. With the C11, I could not even use a 2x barlow on Jupiter and even on the Moon it gets a bit dim with anything other than prime focus stuff. Couldn't use it all on Saturn. I'm hoping it will be okay on Mars, but at f30 or f40 I expect things will be getting a bit dim.

With your scope, you'd probably be better off with the 742nm filter, though having said that the mono Toucam should be more sensitive than the camera I have been using (a Lumenera Infinity 2-1M). Also, I haven't got any data on the IR transmission of the xlt coatings on the C11 as this could obviously have a bearing on the issue.

Hope this helps

Regards

Nick

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Bern, on that link you provided, I was astounded by the Venus images by Rick Schrantz.

It is rare to see such Cloud detail via a ground based telescope.

Super.

Ron.

Pretty sweet considering the images were taken with his Toucam Pro II that we modified to Mono + Raw output.

bern

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sorry to drag this thread off topic for a second, but as RAW modded ToUcams were mentioned - does flashing a Toucam's EEPROM to enable RAW mode effect it's capabilities as a guide cam in any way?

Cheers,

Chris

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sorry to drag this thread off topic for a second, but as RAW modded ToUcams were mentioned - does flashing a Toucam's EEPROM to enable RAW mode effect it's capabilities as a guide cam in any way?

Cheers,

Chris

All the Mono webcams we do are RAW flashed and the LX modded versions are used for guiding. I doubt if the RAW flash itself has any major impact on guiding efficiency but it can't hurt and is reversible anyway.

bern

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue. By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.