Another (better!) ASI120MM Jup image..!

[Kokatha man also!]

Thought I'd post another of the images from the other night taken 14 minutes after the one on my other thread with 48.6 degrees.....

This one is somewhat better, particularly as the finer detail inside the GRS "wake" is much more clearly resolved.....it is only one of my "quicker" processing because my normal "rule" is to allways apply deconvolution to each channel seperately before I combine the channels - this makes for the best outcomes in any one image...

Another reason for posting is because people have asked for one of my processing regimens (horses for courses allways though folks - you'll never get "one size fits all" methods!) and others would like some sort of initial handle on the ASI120MM camera...

I used 512X400 resolution in FireCapture @ 80fps capturing each channel for 60 seconds: 4729 frames captured in each of R,G & B.

Gamma = "50"

Gain R=53, G=53, B=65

Histograms each 81/82%

Exposure = 12.5mS

28 MAPs in AS!2.....26 across the disk of Jove (9, sized 200 & 17 sized 140) and one each for GRS (70) and Junior (40) with 1.5X drizzle, Quality Estimator "Gradient" and noise robusity 4, "Normalize Stack" value 55%.....3000 frames selected out of 4729 frames total in each channel ( this represents between 52% - 55% inclusion from the best frame's quality.)

The resulting .png file dropped into Registax6 and a Histogram stretch range 0-235 with default "smoothness" value.

Wavelets linked and set @ "100" for #1 with a Denoise vale of 0.05 & Sharpen = 0.11.....#2 slider also "100" with Denoise = 0.35 & Sharpen left at the default value "0.10"

12 iterations or 0.8 cw Maximum Entropy in AstraImage after rgb combine.....taken as .tif into CS3 and gamma dropped to 0.86, blue levels adjustment to 0.92 on middle slider and a curves adjustment of 195/195 followed by a single application of "Dust & Scratches" which I faded to 28% and then image reduction to 80% for the 120% image, and another on top of this to 85% for the capture scale image.....canvass resized and text added.....finally saved each as .psd's and .png24's.

[wookie1965]

Cracking images love them if they where bigger and i had your permission id use one as a wallpaper but my screen would stretch the image spoiling it.

[Steve 1962]

Those are great images ..and thanks for the regimen!

[neil phillips]

Cracking stuff Darryl. 80 fps damm. thats a seeing beater. Only 3 min RGBs then, but with added bonus of very fast frame rate. so quite healthy frame count none the less.

Amazing stuff. If i get seeing like this at any point i will be a happy chap. ( i know theres more to it than that ) so far ive been pretty much dissapointed. But thems the breaks. Think i might finally have nailed collimation after major focusser surgary.

Thanks for sharing these sublime images

[Kokatha man also!]

Thanks Wookie & Steve, here's a more "conventional" processing at supersized 150% - applying decon to each channel first before AstraImage rgb combine...later I'll start looking at a WinJupos image.

[Kokatha man also!]

Cracking stuff Darryl. 80 fps damm. thats a seeing beater. Only 3 min RGBs then, but with added bonus of very fast frame rate. so quite healthy frame count none the less.

Amazing stuff. If i get seeing like this at any point i will be a happy chap. ( i know theres more to it than that ) so far ive been pretty much dissapointed. But thems the breaks. Think i might finally have nailed collimation after major focusser surgary.

Thanks for sharing these sublime images

Thanks Neil - there's plenty of time left in this apparition for a good night for you: crikey, it's only hit opposition and usually there's about as much time for imaging after opposition as there was before...hope you get something special for all the work (and thought!) you obviously put into your imaging bro - it's the only way to approach anything "seriously."

.....meanwhile, Saturn is already up here 1.5 hours before the Sun, not sure but think it'll be around 70 degres or so in a month or two..!

[neil phillips]

Thanks Neil - there's plenty of time left in this apparition for a good night for you: crikey, it's only hit opposition and usually there's about as much time for imaging after opposition as there was before...hope you get something special for all the work (and thought!) you obviously put into your imaging bro - it's the only way to approach anything "seriously."

.....meanwhile, Saturn is already up here 1.5 hours before the Sun, not sure but think it'll be around 70 degres or so in a month or two..!

Look foward to seeing your Saturn images. they are going to be something special. This camera ( should have said shouldnt i ) looks stunning. though hard to know whats it like against the flea for example. I assume you havent done a comparison against other chips namely the 618. Cmos has arrived me thinks

[Kokatha man also!]

Hi again Neil - Sam got me interested in his cameras by sending a very compelling and well carried out set of comparison tests between his camera and the DMK618 (then in its early days without FireCapture support, only SharpCap)

It was also hard to refuse a couple of free cameras..!

But now I have gone so far as to say I doubt if my Flea3 will come out of its box.....hard to plug an Expresscard into a laptop (and most don't have these nowadays) and also the power supply for the EPcard and the FW800 cable needed for Fleas when the ASI120MM only needs the usb2 like the DMKs...

EMil Kraaikamp has one too and he commented on CN recently theat it "just became his favourite camera."

I really do think this cam is assisting me on Jupiter - you might remember I showed some late Mars here awhiles back and the ASI120MM was going head-to-head with the Flea3 on that planet...

Hard to knock this camera in any way - half the price or less than the DMK618 and a huge range of resolution from Moon sizes down to Mars sizes yielding 130fps...

Here's that res and fps list if you haven't seen it:

MONO

RES EXP FPS

1280x960 30 30

1280x720 25 40

1280x600 22 45

1280x400 16.2 60

1024x768 12.5 40

1024x600 19.2 55

1024x400 12.5 80

800x800 25 40

800x640 20 50

800x512 16.3 60

800x400 12.5 80

800x320 10 100

640x560 16.2 60

640x480 14 70

512x440 13.7 74

512x400 12.5 80

480x320 10 100

320x240 7.6 130

[beamish]

wow! Darryl they are sooo nice-

I'm watching this cam with interest. Am I right in thinking this is usb2 too ??

obviously the answer is yes having read the last post !

[Kokatha man also!]

Hi Karlo - good to hear from you - thanks!

Those exposures are not fixed - one of the beauties of FireCapture over software like IC Cap etc is you can tailor your exposures at times if needs be.....that table is just my own "cheat sheet" that I keep on the lappy to reference when capturing..!

[Space Cowboy]

They are real pearls. Very interesting camera!

[Kokatha man also!]

Thanks Stuart - I'm leaning towards it being the "numero uno" atm but that could be because of the bribes I've taken from Sam..!

Anyway, here's the individual channels from this avi set.....I'm doing a repro 'cos I've found a way to screw more detail out without compromising the image in any way, and I'm not talking WinJupos compilations.....that'll come later..!

[si@nite]

Just fantastic images Darryl some of the best detail ive seen, processing looks spot on.

Thanks for sharing.

[themos]

I used 512X400 resolution in FireCapture @ 80fps capturing each channel for 60 seconds: 4729 frames captured in each of R,G & B.

I have the ASI130MM on loan from rwg and I have to ask: How do you get away with 12.5 ms exposure? I used an 8 inch f/10 SCT with a 2.5x Barlow and I can't get enough light in less than 125ms. Also, how do you use the custom resolution in FireCapture, do you play with the ROI or with the Cut-Out? I couldn't get more than 30fps out of FireCapture.

[astroman001]

Hi Darryl,

Fantastic detail even inside the GRS. I must look into that new camera. The seeing must have been superb and you have processed it so well.

A gem.

regards

Peter

[JamesF]

Taking 1280x960 @ 30fps as an example...

In mono, that's 1280 x 960 x 30 x 12 (bits per pixel) = 442368000 bps, or 422Mbps for the raw data alone. Effective USB2.0 throughput is 280Mbps as far as I recall, so I wonder if some sort of compression is going on and if it's lossy? If there is some sort of lossy compression, hopefully it isn't enabled for 512x400 @ 80fps which should need just a smidge under 200Mbps.

For colour the situation is presumably even worse though it's not clear from the website what the specs of the colour camera are unless they're exactly the same, in which case how do they fit almost 1.3Gbps down a 280Mbps pipe?

Or do I have my maths wrong?

James

[Kokatha man also!]

Thanks Simon and Peter - your comments are appreciated!

Themos, the ASI130MM and the ASI120MM are 2 different cameras so I don't think you can transpose much of the individual characteristics and capabilities.....and I use a C14 which has considerable "light grasp."

Also, the ASI120MM uses a new "Build 32" of FireCapture that is part of his latest beta series - I'm sure Torsten is only too happy for folks to use it but, they may have to email him for the specific updates/patches if they use/purchase the ASI120MM.

[michael.h.f.wilkinson]

Stunning images! Really great detail.

[Kokatha man also!]

Thanks Michael, much appreciated!

James, I'm sorry but I'm too tired to go through your rational (it's 1:50am here!) but I think there's holes in it - suffice to say that from what myself, Emil & Sam find, the camera appears to have very low noise and is free from the artefacts that all its' competitors display to some degree or another...even at 130fps for Mars I was getting very sweet images at under 5" diameter: besides which, I think the results show its' merits - and these are what I'm much more interested in. .

[JamesF]

No problem Darryl. I absolutely agree that the results are very impressive. I'm just interested in what goes on "underneath the hood", as it were, and when I can't make the numbers add up I like to get to the bottom of why. Which doesn't preclude me adding up incorrectly, certainly

James

[Alan]

Fantastic results Darryl .. real fly-by quality ! A new camera perhaps, I know its nearly Christmas but I think the wife may have other plans .......

Alan

[StuW]

I see what you're saying, but I've just had a look at one of my video's from my last session and a 1:53 video is 6,189,334,528 bytes which works out at 438182kbps or 59fps. I don't know how he does it, but he does. I'll fire off an email to him and see what he says.

Taking 1280x960 @ 30fps as an example...

In mono, that's 1280 x 960 x 30 x 12 (bits per pixel) = 442368000 bps, or 422Mbps for the raw data alone. Effective USB2.0 throughput is 280Mbps as far as I recall, so I wonder if some sort of compression is going on and if it's lossy? If there is some sort of lossy compression, hopefully it isn't enabled for 512x400 @ 80fps which should need just a smidge under 200Mbps.

For colour the situation is presumably even worse though it's not clear from the website what the specs of the colour camera are unless they're exactly the same, in which case how do they fit almost 1.3Gbps down a 280Mbps pipe?

Or do I have my maths wrong?

James

[sologuitarist61]

Some nice detail there, especially inside the GRS well done

[cgarry]

Taking 1280x960 @ 30fps as an example...

In mono, that's 1280 x 960 x 30 x 12 (bits per pixel) = 442368000 bps, or 422Mbps for the raw data alone. Effective USB2.0 throughput is 280Mbps as far as I recall, so I wonder if some sort of compression is going on and if it's lossy? If there is some sort of lossy compression, hopefully it isn't enabled for 512x400 @ 80fps which should need just a smidge under 200Mbps.

For colour the situation is presumably even worse though it's not clear from the website what the specs of the colour camera are unless they're exactly the same, in which case how do they fit almost 1.3Gbps down a 280Mbps pipe?

Or do I have my maths wrong?

James

I thought USB2 could do 480Mbps...

Cheers,

Chris

[JamesF]

I thought USB2 could do 480Mbps...

Cheers,

Chris

Just been to check on Wikipedia, which says 480Mbps is the maximum signalling rate, but the effective rate is 280Mbps. I assume the lower figure is supposed to be after all the transmission overheads have been factored in, but that does seem like an enormous drop, implying a very large overhead. I'm struggling to find anything that disagrees very much with the idea of 280Mbps as the realistic maximum data rate though.

James