Jupiter SPC900 fps comparison (30-1-13 - poor seeing)

[tingting44]

Well finally got a long enough break in cloud to do some fps comparisons with the SPC900 and to be honest i personally can not see any difference at all from using 5fps to using 60fps with the SPC900, Please all C&C welcome and let me know if you think there is much if any difference between the fps?

I also was able to use my new x2 barlow with my old x2 barlow giving me x4! it was very hard to gain focus tho as the smallest twitch of the focus knob and it would go out of direction one way then the slightest touch the other way would take it out of focus the other way lol so very hard to gain focus with the 130p and x4 barlow! but i done it on a few runs

DOBULE SW x2 barlow = X4 ~ {SPC900} @ 5fps - 60 secs AVI ~ PIPP ~ AVI ~ Registax 6 ~ PS CS5 - LR4

X4!!! 30_01_2013 09_43_02 PM_pipp STACK - PS - LR by tingting44, on Flickr

DOBULE SW x2 barlow = X4 ~ {SPC900} @ 15fps - 55 secs AVI ~ PIPP ~ AVI ~ Registax 6 ~ PS CS5 - (could not get this file to run in LightRoom4 so no NR)

X4!!! 30_01_2013 09_38_21 PM_pippSTACK by tingting44, on Flickr

DOBULE SW x2 barlow = X4 ~ {SPC900} @ 25fps - 49 secs AVI ~ PIPP ~ AVI ~ Registax 6 ~ PS CS5 - LR4

X4!!! 30_01_2013 09_40_37 PM_pipp STACK PS - LR4 by tingting44, on Flickr

SINGLE SW x2 barlow = X2 ~ {SPC900} @ 60fps - 14 secs AVI ~ PIPP ~ AVI ~ Registax 6

(really gutted i didnt capture the 60fps with x4 barlow as its different now to the comparison's now but next chance i get i will capture 60fps with the double barlow setup)

Capture 30_01_2013 09_17_16 PM_pipp STACK by tingting44, on Flickr

SINGLE SW x2 barlow = X2 ~ {SPC900} @ 60fps - 35 secs AVI ~ PIPP ~ AVI ~ Registax 6

Capture 30_01_2013 09_32_36 PM_pipp STACK by tingting44, on Flickr

think focus could have been better also, ive tried using the bahtinov mask but i seem to get better results just by focusing by eye without the mask

clear skies

Martin

[Freddie]

What was your exposure duration as unless you were 1/60 sec or faster you would not have been capturing 60fps. I doubt you were capturing enough light to be using 1/60sec.

[tingting44]

What was your exposure duration as unless you were 1/60 sec or faster you would not have been capturing 60fps. I doubt you were capturing enough light to be using 1/60sec.

i dont have shutter speed do i on a webcam??? here is the log details, it says 60fps so are you saying its not 60fps? please teach me lol as im learning still

this is the log for the 1st 60fps pic above

[Philips SPC 900NC PC Camera]

Frame Divisor=1

Resolution=640x480

Frame Rate (fps)=60.00

Colour Space / Compression=YUY2

Exposure=-4

Brightness=100

Contrast=36

Saturation=75

Gamma=0

ColorEnable=255

BacklightCompensation=0

Gain=2

[Freddie]

No problem. That looks like sharpcap data so you don't actually get an exposure reading in seconds, just a number. In reality this sets the exposure time for each frame which for a webcam is fractions of a second. To actually achieve 60fps you need to be capturing each frame in 1/60 second. If each frame had an exposure of say 1/20 second you could only capture 20 frames in a second. What the software will do is set the exposure time correctly and if the frame rate is set too high, capture as many frames as it can in a second. If the exposure is set to a very short exposure and a very slow frame rate, the software will obviously be able to achieve both the correct exposure time and frame rate.

If you look at the actual number of frames you have captured in your first 60fps run you should have 840 frames (60fps x 14seconds) I would imagine it will be less. Just divide the number of frames you actually have by 14 and that will give you the actual frame rate.

Hope that makes sense, come back to me if not.

[Space Cowboy]

I think the 60fps setting repeats the same frames its not a true frame rate because the spc is usb 1.1 it can't physically get the frames down the pipe at that rate.

[themos]

Why don't you try shooting something indoors at low light conditions? I've looked at individual frames @5fps and @20fps and I could definitely see a difference.

[Josh Wilson]

Try downloading FireCapture. It has more settings to choose from for more advanced imagers and during a preview or capture it shows the true frame rate rather than the selected one. It also has the ability to pause, not stop, a capture allowing people without tracking to capture as many frames as one with tracking. That is the selling point for me. Definitely give it a try.

Josh

[tingting44]

thanks guys for your help, i will defo look more closely into sharpcap's fps's and try to figure out the true fps, also firecapture sounds good if it has more capture options, its not easy getting your head around all of the ins and out's is it lol hopefully i will get there soon...

will take on all the above info and tips for next session/attempt hopefully over the weekend as my area is suppose to be clear skies this weekend?

the wife will be back soon with my ingredients to make my home made scotch bonnet soup (to keep me warm on the gazing session's lol) thanks to MOONMONKEY for the reicipe!

p.s. now im thinking that all the above comparions are basicly the same fps? as they all look the same as each other be it at 5fps or 60fps? lol i dont know

[si@nite]

HI Martin, theres no point in using any frame rate over 10fps with your spc 900 because usualy anything over 5 fps induces compression and sometimes can interfere with the exposure frame being read properly! can result in frames being dropped. Like Freddie says best to work out just what frame rate your actualy getting.

[tingting44]

Thanks also Simon

yes i think i will try firecapture out if that gives you a true FPS and see how i get on with learning firecapture fingers crossed for tonight, just going to look for firecapture now to download so im all ready for the clear skies!

all the best

Martin

[tingting44]

well i have downloaded firecapture now, go to open it and it says my pc does not have java? which i think it does, then it ask's me if i want to download java....i click ok and nothing happens, i have done this 5 times now and the same result everytime? any suggestions?

edit, ooppsss sorry guess i did not have java lol all working now

edit, just done a test capture with the SPC900 and firecapture, and when i put it to capture at 60fps the max it could capture was 30fps, so i guess 30fps would be the very highest i could capture at, i cant seem to move the EXP (ms) slider tho (im guessing this is what you were on about freddy about shutter speed right?

also i have a IR filter on my SPC900 so on firecaptures capture setting ive got the profile on Jupiter and the filter on IR, is that correct?

[Freddie]

Sorry, no experience of firecapture so can't help there. You do however need to get the exposure control as this will control the length of each exposure (not a shutter speed as such as there is no shutter on a webcam). I'm sure someone with firecapture experience will come along to help with that specific software.

[Aenima]

Hi tingting

I used firecapture for a while before sharpcap and my impression at the time regarding the various presets was that they were kind of optimised for each type of planet/filter etc. but mostly I think they were labels for aiding memory with multiple cams, so you could quickly and easily swap rgb filters or change from cam to cam without getting mixed up - later this info would be useful during processing.

I mainly say this because you can alter the preset's parameters and save them that way, but they'd still be called IR mars or whatever. So you'd have it set up initially using the jupiter IR preset and then tweak it to how you want it then save it under a name for next time, and do this for each camera, scope and planet etc.,

Sometimes you can tick or untick a box in video settings which allows you control over exposure slider (advanced settings or something like that, a 'cog' symbol). Like video capture filter in sharpcap.

Sorry been a while since I used firecapture..

Regards

Aenima

[jnc71106]

can't really help with the fps on the camera martin as i'm only getting into planetary imaging now myself but they are nice images all the same, hopefully you will come and join us tomorrow if the weather stays clear

[Josh Wilson]

You can download Java for free from the Internet. Try that and see if FireCapture works after that.

Josh

[tingting44]

thanks got java now and all is ok Josh

thanks jake for your kind words mate, hopefully clear skies tomorrow night

all taking on board i think i just need to have a real time play with firecapture now and actually capture some data lool, im sure it should click into place when i actually have a live go at it hardest thing i find is actually finding the object on the screen lol i might have to pop on my finder scope as my telrad is great but not as accurate when u need to find jupiter on the spc900's little sensor lol

clear skies

Martin

[Sammyb]

I was always under the impression you shouldn't use anything faster than 10fps on an SPC900. Faster and you get compression of the data.

[Space Cowboy]

Yep far better to capture a longer avi at 10fps. With the focal length your scope is working at a 4-5 min avi would be fine. Rotational blur is not an issue at this scale.

[tingting44]

I was always under the impression you shouldn't use anything faster than 10fps on an SPC900. Faster and you get compression of the data.

Yes even if you select say 60fps it will just do the max possible which seems to be 30fps, but i wont be going over 10fps from now on

Yep far better to capture a longer avi at 10fps. With the focal length your scope is working at a 4-5 min avi would be fine. Rotational blur is not an issue at this scale.

ohh very interesting buddy! ive only been capturing 1 minute max as i did not want to get rotational blur, but like you say at my scale it shouldnt be a problem, i will try a 5 min avi next chance i get (hopefully tonight!!!)

i cant wait till i have to worry about rotational blur!!! lol if i win the lotto tonight i will be ordering a C14!! mwahahaha i can dream

[bus_ter]

Sorry I haven't read the whole thread, but my initial thoughts are that you're not pushing the limits of the camera. All of these images are limited by your scope and I don't think the loss in quality using higher compression at higher frame rates is going to be noticeable. I think we would need someone with a large SCT to do these tests to see a clear loss in quality and detail from the higher fps.

[tingting44]

Sorry I haven't read the whole thread, but my initial thoughts are that you're not pushing the limits of the camera. All of these images are limited by your scope and I don't think the loss in quality using higher compression at higher frame rates is going to be noticeable. I think we would need someone with a large SCT to do these tests to see a clear loss in quality and detail from the higher fps.

that MIGHT be me!!! if i win tho lotto tonight i will be ordering my lovely C14 SCT

[Aenima]

Martin, either way from the results i've seen your definitely doing something right! It took me a year to get close to those kind of images with an 8inch scope , should've tried a little harder with my 130p!

Dont know if you have tried firecapture yet but if you figure out a good way to use it i'll have to get some pointers, you probably know the feeling where it seems like you've reached a limit regarding getting better images (equipment or technique) ..? the atmosphere doesnt help. ( just before jupiter vanished behind neighbours rooftop I managed a small improvement, have to wait for it to return now.)

Anyway, all the best with the next clear sky.

Regards

Aenima