I could get used to this...

[James]

It's clear here near Exeter so am out in the garden enjoying the last bit of darkness before it goes away for a few weeks. I'm imaging and doing some video astronomy at the same time...

I could really get used to this - here is just one 25 second image of M51/Whirlpool through a Lodestar using Paul81's Lodestarlive software on my Mac, in an 8" SW Quattro:

… and 1x  30 seconds of M101:

Whilst it could be argued that live stacking of such images isn't quite 'video' I can't wait to see what views we'll get.

James

[Sandraj]

They look very nice, so there is some software for Mac's then. I often see people asking who have them.

[Luke]

I can see the attraction video astronomy has! I have slipped into it when capturing solar (using of course the special dedicated solar safety filters) and lunar movies. It does look pretty impressive on-screen. With white light solar, the granulation is so punchy on screen. The Moon, I can get a lovely contrast. I still love eyepiece views, they seem to show the objects in a different way, but sitting comfortably on a chair, using both eyes, high contrast images - it certainly does have its plus points, just from my limited experience so far!

I do wonder if we will one day have digital eyepieces that capture the light for several seconds.

[Martin Meredith]

Superb images for 25/30s.

Martin

[DoctorD]

Hi James

Stunning images for 30s - looks like the Quattro is well suited - are you using any focal reducer?

CS

Paul

[DoctorD]

Just checked the spec and at F4 the Quattro will not need reduction.

Paul

[Scott]

That's pretty amazing James,

So much detail for such short exp.

I know next to nothing about video astronomy so forgive me if I'm being daft, but I imagine you'd need quite dark skies for it?

Come to think of it I actually do know nothing about it .

[Martin Meredith]

That's pretty amazing James,

So much detail for such short exp.

I know next to nothing about video astronomy so forgive me if I'm being daft, but I imagine you'd need quite dark skies for it?

Come to think of it I actually do know nothing about it .

Dark skies always help of course but are nowhere near as critical as for pure visual. Check out Nytecam's images from London   . Stoke will be fine so long as you're not right next to the Britannia :-)

Martin

[Scott]

Dark skies always help of course but are nowhere near as critical as for pure visual. Check out Nytecam's images from London   . Stoke will be fine so long as you're not right next to the Britannia :-)

Martin

Thanks Martin, No I'm on the crewe side of newcastle.

[James]

That's pretty amazing James,

So much detail for such short exp.

I know next to nothing about video astronomy so forgive me if I'm being daft, but I imagine you'd need quite dark skies for it?

Come to think of it I actually do know nothing about it .

I'm not exactly an expert myself either! I figured I wanted to give video a go as a few years back I was a visual only astronomer until I saw a 30 second sub appear on a computer screen and figured there was so much more there to see that I'd better try imaging... some years later I've almost gone full circle back to observing except that my eyes aren't as good and I can't afford a five metre telescope to allow me the views that I've gotten used to after imaging.

Imaging also takes a huge investment in time and effort - well worth it when you get a final image but....

One of the advantages touted about video astronomy is that it cuts through light pollution. I think that's not necessarily quite correct or at least it's not as simple as that but using a CCD camera and displaying the results in real time on the computer screen does allow you to see much more than you'd get just by using your eyes. You can see more using a camera even with light pollution and a full moon but as usual, if you have darker skies you'll see a little more. If you're n central London/Manchester/Birmingham (put in city of your choice) then with the eyes you'll not see much but with a camera you'll see considerably more.

What I've really liked so far with video (I've been playing with a PD1 video camera and with a Lodestar using Paul81's LodestarLive software) is that you can display, live on your laptop/TV whatever a view that shows far more than you'll see with your eyes and scope alone. The kids appreciate it as they have never really appreciated looking into an eyepiece at "a grey smudge". Comparatively short exposures like 20-30 seconds can really show an impressive amount - and don't require auto guiding etc..

For me this is a completely visual thing, I've no desire to create 'images' of what I see (that's what I have my imaging kit for..) hence the images I've posted are literally screenshots, you're seeing what I saw. You can see straight away the compromises as well as the extra data - the view you get is aesthetically nowhere near as nice/pretty as a crisp sharp view through a nice eyepiece on a scope but instead you get to see more of an object.

Pauls LodestarLive software allows some on the fly tweaking of the otherwise live image which is cool - you can get rid of the worst of the hot pixels and some of the noise. When Paul finishes the stacking functionality you should be able to display more or less live on screen some views that are aesthetically much closer to a nice eyepiece view. Some video cameras out there do something similar - I must admit to wanting to give a Mallicam a go with the Miloslick software to see just how close to an eyepiece view I can get but with all the extra info that the CCD picks up...

James

PS Doctor D, you're quite right - I'm not using any reduction At f/4 the focusing tolerance etc is already quite tight....

[Helen]

That looks like a lot of fun James  My first camera was actually a Watec videocam and I did enjoy it, before the urge to record what I'd seen took over and I ended up getting a CCD 

This might be a daft question, but.... does lodestarlive only work with a lodestar?  Would my Atik16ic work?  or even the 460?  It might be fun to play with when the skies don't look good enough for proper imaging!

Helen

[James]

It's only the Lodestar at the mo I believe. NickK is working on his app to allow Atik's to be used in similar ways but that may only be on the Mac as that's the platform he's been working on... I must admit, I'd be intrigued to see what the 460 would be like used this way

James

[shirva]

good stuff james

[HiloDon]

Hi James,

Nice results!

I recently purchased a Lodestar X2 based on Nytecam's work with it and Paul's Lodestar Live s/w. I am really happy with the results I'm getting using my 100mm ed refractor. I saw that you have the one shot color box checked. Is your lodestar the C? The Lodestar 2X has twice the sensitivity of the original Lodestar mono and more than twice of the C version. I wanted color, but liked the high sensitivity of the X2. Now that I have it, I like the mono image because it's more like looking through the eyepiece. Paul's s/w is great and he's working on making it better. I use a Mac as well, but I find that saving the image file is easy and looks just like the screen. I just took some shots with a .63 focal reducer to get a little wider FOV to see the summer nebulae. I've attached some here.

[HiloDon]

I do wonder if we will one day have digital eyepieces that capture the light for several seconds.

Hi Luke,

There are some guys that are adapting image intensifiers to telescopes. The latest ones developed by the military for night vision appear to be very good. The image you see is real time with no delay. The view is mono and has a green cast just like night vision goggles. Right now I think the later generation IT's can't be shipped out of the US. The technology of all of these image aids is advancing rapidly. Isn't it great?

[James]

I recently purchased a Lodestar X2 based on Nytecam's work with it and Paul's Lodestar Live s/w. I am really happy with the results I'm getting using my 100mm ed refractor. I saw that you have the one shot color box checked. Is your lodestar the C? The Lodestar 2X has twice the sensitivity of the original Lodestar mono and more than twice of the C version. I wanted color, but liked the high sensitivity of the X2. Now that I have it, I like the mono image because it's more like looking through the eyepiece. Paul's s/w is great and he's working on making it better. I use a Mac as well, but I find that saving the image file is easy and looks just like the screen. I just took some shots with a .63 focal reducer to get a little wider FOV to see the summer nebulae. I've attached some here.

You do well with your ED100 given the f/9 ratio

I have the Lodestar-C and had been considering switching to the mono version for the same reason you like it... but it's nice to get a bit of colour too. The Lodestar X2 is new and is therefor selling as quick as we get them in  so it'll be a while before I get my hands on one.

Pauls software is what made me give it a go - I've used a Lodestar for guiding for ages and often found it amusing to get a nice view of the object I'm imaging through the Lodestar whilst it guides . With the software being on the Mac I couldn't not give it a good go!

I have a video camera as well, one of the PD Colour Cams from here:  http://www.astrophoto.co.uk/cameras.htm I've enjoyed using it but I must confess to appreciating the ability to adjust things etc whilst sat down at my laptop rather than getting up to press buttons on the back of the camera.

James

[James]

... but sitting comfortably on a chair, using both eyes, high contrast images - it certainly does have its plus points, just from my limited experience so far!

I also transmit the picture into our lounge on the TV via the wifi... kids can see what I'm seeing without coming out and sticking mucky fingers on my eyepieces!!

James