What size to take pictures / videos DSLR

[Sean L]

Hi, I took my first astro pics the other night using my new dslr and when I up loaded them to my computer I quickly realized that I had shot them at a huge size (I think its was around 5k but thats off the top of my head).  When it came to processing all of the images I had real problems as the file sizes were so large and as a result had to lower the quality of my images to make them a workable size.  So I thought id ask what sizes other people shot at and kept a nice quality image or if you prefer to just reduce the size another way? Thanks!  

[haitch]

18.1MP RAW files - you want as much data as you can get (I presume you are taking deep sky). Yes you have to wait or get a powerful pc!

Tell us some more - what is your set up... are you using a camera lens or a scope at prime focus?

I'm a beginner myself and not wanting to throw away and of the multitude of shots you soon end up investing in external hard drives. I also try to take images with one pc and process them with another (the more powerful one) so you are not tied up whilst it's working.

[Stargazer33]

I always shoot at maximum resolution. You can never have too much detail. I also shoot jpg + RAW. I don't know if the resolution setting effects RAW files.

As long as your target doesn't fill the whole frame, you can always crop your image in a programme like PIPP. PIPP will crop each frame of the ones you select and centres your target so making stacking in a programme like Registax easier.

HTH.

[haitch]

Also you tend to end up cropping later on for vignetting or framing so you don't want to lose anything early on.

[frugal]

You want to be shooting in RAW which means you can read out the signal as the cera stores it. If you use a smaller setting, the camera still takes a 5000x3000 image, but it then rescales it to a smaller size before writting it to the SD card. You have no idea how it is doing the scaling andit will them store the image as an 8 bit jpeg rather than a 14 bit raw file.

As others have said you are far better off keeping the full sized RAW files until you have finished stacking them. It does take longer but you will get far better images at the end of it.

Sent from my GT-N7000 using Tapatalk

[Sean L]

Thanks!   I was using a scope at prime focus.  I was shooting Jpeg stills and Movs to convert to avi to stack in registax. I was having a go at Jupiter and the moon as it was my first time but I do want to have a go at deep sky objects.  So am I doing it wrong using the dslr to shoot videos to stack? should i be going for RAW photos? Thanks for great reply's!!   

[lensman57]

Thanks!   I was using a scope at prime focus.  I was shooting Jpeg stills and Movs to convert to avi to stack in registax. I was having a go at Jupiter and the moon as it was my first time but I do want to have a go at deep sky objects.  So am I doing it wrong using the dslr to shoot videos to stack? should i be going for RAW photos? Thanks for great reply's!!   

What is the camera, the aperture of the scope and its focal ratio? As for shootings Jpegs, that is not good, shoot raw and jpegs if you have to so you are  be able to view the jpegs to see what you have. As for the size of the capture, your cameras pixel sizes are not going to change if you have the in camera facility to reduce the size of the capture, this is different to changing the quality as in small jpeg, medium or large or raw. Unless you have a scope with a very long focal length or your subject matter is a huge nebula like NGC 1499 or M42 then all those lovely pixels you have are rather wasted, even with a1000mm of FL, Jupiter will be nothing but a very small disc on your sensor and you are absolutely right about processing large files from DSLRs being nothing but a pain requiring huge amount of ram in your machine, PS does better with these files  but PS is not an AP processing software. If your  interest is the planets you could get yourself a webcam  which is less demanding on the specs of the machine, in any case you are going to need a huge amount of harddisc space as the AVI files are huge . Welcome to Astro imaging

Regards,

A.G

[Steve Ward]

For Lunar imaging you'll be much better off shooting multiple RAW stills and stacking those than using the inbuilt video function , not sure as to the technical details but experience with using the video from the 1100D that I had for a while proved the point to me , the video never came close on either Lunar or Solar imaging.

There's a great tutorial from JamesF on Lunar imaging here somewhere , I'll try and find it for you ... 

[Steve Ward]

Here you go .... http://stargazerslounge.com/topic/184192-full-disc-lunar-imaging-with-a-dslr/

Thank you James ... 

[Sean L]

What is the camera, the aperture of the scope and its focal ratio? As for shootings Jpegs, that is not good, shoot raw and jpegs if you have to so you are  be able to view the jpegs to see what you have. As for the size of the capture, your cameras pixel sizes are not going to change if you have the in camera facility to reduce the size of the capture, this is different to changing the quality as in small jpeg, medium or large or raw. Unless you have a scope with a very long focal length or your subject matter is a huge nebula like NGC 1499 or M42 then all those lovely pixels you have are rather wasted, even with a1000mm of FL, Jupiter will be nothing but a very small disc on your sensor and you are absolutely right about processing large files from DSLRs being nothing but a pain requiring huge amount of ram in your machine, PS does better with these files  but PS is not an AP processing software. If your  interest is the planets you could get yourself a webcam  which is less demanding on the specs of the machine, in any case you are going to need a huge amount of harddisc space as the AVI files are huge . Welcome to Astro imaging

Regards,

A.G

Hi, thanks for your time,  the camera is a Canon 600D, the scope Aperture 130 mm (5.1 inches). Focal length 900 mm (f/6.92).  I have 32 gig of ram ( I need it for work as im in VFX) so processing isn't really a problem, but I want to be able to get the best images I can.  If shooting in RAW do i just keep snapping away as the target goes across the viewfinder? Also say i take 20 pictures of the moon going across the viewfinder then move the scope to get it back to where i took the first picture and then take 20 more is that ok?  I dont under stand how people take 100 pictures before the object is out of the viewfinder... Thanks!! 

[frugal]

Either they are using a tracking mount so it never goes out of the window, or they are taking a lot of shots really quickly. If you are tak8ng stills of the moon you will probably have a shutter speed of about 1/1000 seconds. So I tend to turn on the high speed motor and just hold the shutter down and take 20 shots at a time (takes about 4 seconds)

Sent from my GT-N7000 using Tapatalk

[Sean L]

Either they are using a tracking mount so it never goes out of the window, or they are taking a lot of shots really quickly. If you are tak8ng stills of the moon you will probably have a shutter speed of about 1/1000 seconds. So I tend to turn on the high speed motor and just hold the shutter down and take 20 shots at a time (takes about 4 seconds)Sent from my GT-N7000 using Tapatalk

Thanks, that completely slipped my mind... Iv got a tracking mound but getting it setup seems well beyond me at the moment...

[Alien 13]

Thanks, that completely slipped my mind... Iv got a tracking mound but getting it setup seems well beyond me at the moment...

For capturing planet images the polar alignment etc doesnt need the accuracy required for DSO so setting north with a compass and adjusting your latitude using the scale should be close enough to get a few mins in the viewfinder.

Alan

[laser_jock99]

Always shoot in RAW format to extract the most data. You can downsize the image at any time.

Sounds like you need a better computer too?