Lodestar Live compared to video

[RobertI]

Hi all,

I am just starting out in this forum and learning about video electronically assisted observing. I have been using my lodestar (originally purchased for long exposure imaging) and lodestar Live to capture some really nice images real-time at the scope. With the coming addition of stacking in LodestarLive it seems we have something akin to video imaging? Being completely ignorant about astronomy video cameras like the Mallincam I don't really understand the advantages and disadvantages of either setup.

What are the fundamental differences between this lodestar live setup and Video Cameras like the Mallincam?

Thanks

Rob

[RobertI]

Hi all,

I am just starting out in this forum and learning about video electronically assisted observing

I meant "electronically assisted observing" not "video electronically assisted observing"........

[NickK]

I wouldn't worry about the naming

The loadstar + LL is basically a sensitive sensor and then taking images and aligning them automatically to stack.

millicam is performing higher gain and then analogue output - it's possible that the image is stacked in the analogue domain.

The technology differs but essentially there are a few points:

a) The most sensitive sensor is used

High gain is used to make low voltages from the CCD higher output - basically a brighter image - the trick here is to limit the noise being added

c) near realtime image processing is done to display the images as they're being build..

d) fast, or large scopes are used to push as many photons onto the sensor as possible during the exposure time

In the end most people use electronics to see more than they would with the naked eye through an eyepiece, or do so to cope with not being able to physically bend to view with an eyepiece.

[Spacedout]

Hi all,

I am just starting out in this forum and learning about video electronically assisted observing. I have been using my lodestar (originally purchased for long exposure imaging) and lodestar Live to capture some really nice images real-time at the scope. With the coming addition of stacking in LodestarLive it seems we have something akin to video imaging? Being completely ignorant about astronomy video cameras like the Mallincam I don't really understand the advantages and disadvantages of either setup.

What are the fundamental differences between this lodestar live setup and Video Cameras like the Mallincam?

Thanks

Rob

Hello Rob,

I own two Mallincams and some other CCTV cameras all used for Video Astronomy.  I do not know much about the Lodestar so won't be able to offer any useful information to the differences but what I would say is watch out for the Live Broadcasts here http://astrovideoforum.proboards.com/page/channel_page  There are several guys who broadcast live from time to time so pop in now and then to see if anyone is on.  The guys use all sorts of cameras for VA so it is well worth a look.  This way you get to see them using the different types of cameras, see what settings they use and best of all see the results all live.  You can even use the chat to ask questions as they go.  I myself am hoping to get on again tonight if you fancy popping in for a chat www.justin.tv/spacedout555 if you're busy just check on the other link from time to time to see who is on.  Hope this helps and good luck

Best regards

Karl

[RobertI]

Thanks for the replies guys.

Nick - thanks for clarifying the main elements of both approaches, that helps

Karl - I did try to access your broadcast but had some issues with Justin.tv, will try again. Are your broadcasts available to watch again?

Cheers

Rob

[Spacedout]

Hi Rob,

JTV do not record anymore though which is a shame but I do have another channel with New Live Stream that does - https://new.livestream.com/spaced-out/events/3006293/videos/51269110  I have not used the channel much so all the clips here are test runs but they do show you a little sample of what can be done.  As for JTV not sure what your issue was but if you want to try again I'm hoping to get on there again tonight, fingers crossed!

Best regards

Karl

[DoctorD]

Hi Rob

Both video cameras such as the Mallicam and the Lodestar use sensitive CCD imaging devices, the primary difference is that you can use the video camera without a computer as the processing is done inside the camera (you still need monitor or TV screen). However the line gets blurred when you start using additional processing with the video camera such as Miloslick - I believe this adds another level of processing & stacking done on the computer.

Lodestar Live is still in it's infancy and Paul81 is doing a terrific job - however, it's still a labour of love rather than a business proposition, fuelled by Paul's enthusiasm and our encouragement.

The results I've seen with Malincam's are fantastic and clearly the cameras have gone though a lot of R&D to achieve the results we see. 

As applications such as Lodestar Live are developed I'm sure we'll see even greater levels of functionality and performance - imagine what Paul18 could achieve if he had an R&D budget!!

One possible advantage of the using the Lodestar is that with a USB interface we can get direct access to the data form the CCD without needing to go through the digital to analogue and back to digital conversion, giving programs live Loadstar Live access to the cleanest data. That said I also believe that some of the Malicams offer a USB interface - however I must say that I have no first hand experience of the Malicams, I've only played with the SDC435 video security camera.

One thing is certain, what ever route you take, Electronically assisted viewing will let you "see" far more than you can with the naked eye at the eye piece - and certainly will make a huge improvement if you suffer for local light pollution, as I do, which restricts your dark adaption.

Clear skies

Paul

[Astrogate]

DoctorD, on 08 Jul 2014 - 08:46 AM, said:

Hi Rob

Both video cameras such as the Mallicam and the Lodestar use sensitive CCD imaging devices, the primary difference is that you can use the video camera without a computer as the processing is done inside the camera (you still need monitor or TV screen). However the line gets blurred when you start using additional processing with the video camera such as Miloslick - I believe this adds another level of processing & stacking done on the computer.

Lodestar Live is still in it's infancy and Paul81 is doing a terrific job - however, it's still a labour of love rather than a business proposition, fuelled by Paul's enthusiasm and our encouragement.

The results I've seen with Malincam's are fantastic and clearly the cameras have gone though a lot of R&D to achieve the results we see. 

As applications such as Lodestar Live are developed I'm sure we'll see even greater levels of functionality and performance - imagine what Paul18 could achieve if he had an R&D budget!!

One possible advantage of the using the Lodestar is that with a USB interface we can get direct access to the data form the CCD without needing to go through the digital to analogue and back to digital conversion, giving programs live Loadstar Live access to the cleanest data. That said I also believe that some of the Malicams offer a USB interface - however I must say that I have no first hand experience of the Malicams, I've only played with the SDC435 video security camera.

One thing is certain, what ever route you take, Electronically assisted viewing will let you "see" far more than you can with the naked eye at the eye piece - and certainly will make a huge improvement if you suffer for local light pollution, as I do, which restricts your dark adaption.

Clear skies

Paul

Hi Paul

Just to correct what you mentioned, only the Mallincam is a video camera that can work with or without a computer where as the Lodestar needs a computer to operate.

Clear skies,

Chris A

Astrogate

[Astrogate]

I wouldn't worry about the naming

The loadstar + LL is basically a sensitive sensor and then taking images and aligning them automatically to stack.

millicam is performing higher gain and then analogue output - it's possible that the image is stacked in the analogue domain.

The technology differs but essentially there are a few points:

a) The most sensitive sensor is used

High gain is used to make low voltages from the CCD higher output - basically a brighter image - the trick here is to limit the noise being added

c) near realtime image processing is done to display the images as they're being build..

d) fast, or large scopes are used to push as many photons onto the sensor as possible during the exposure time

In the end most people use electronics to see more than they would with the naked eye through an eyepiece, or do so to cope with not being able to physically bend to view with an eyepiece.

Hi Nick

The Mallincam vide CCD camera does not stack the image internally. The images are captured at 30 FPS NTSC or 25 FPS PAL but the electronic shutter remains open for the during of the exposure just like a traditional astronomy CCD camera. I have demonstrated this many times on NSN by showing with tracking off the trailing shows a solid line and not a dashed line which is what you would get if the camera was stacking internally.

Chris A

Astrogate

[Astrogate]

Hi Nick

The Mallincam video CCD camera does not stack the image internally. The images are captured at 30 FPS NTSC or 25 FPS PAL but the electronic shutter remains open for the duration of the exposure just like a traditional astronomy CCD camera. I have demonstrated this many times on NSN by showing with tracking off the trailing shows a solid line and not a dashed line which is what you would get if the camera was stacking internally.

Chris A

Astrogate

[shirva]

Still lost me chris..

[shirva]

Nice wee mallincam tutorial needed for us thats intrested

[NickK]

Hi Nick

The Mallincam video CCD camera does not stack the image internally. The images are captured at 30 FPS NTSC or 25 FPS PAL but the electronic shutter remains open for the duration of the exposure just like a traditional astronomy CCD camera. I have demonstrated this many times on NSN by showing with tracking off the trailing shows a solid line and not a dashed line which is what you would get if the camera was stacking internally.

Chris A

Astrogate

I'm using the subtle distinction of "stacking" i.e. without alignment first. Static stacking is where the images are added/averaged but not moved to align the objects. You can sum the images and still provide the current image sum at 25 fps etc. If you move the camera it will show a blurring.

I don't know the design, but because the camera is giving 25 or 50 fps doesn't exclude the possibility of summing or averaging images - in the analogue or digital domain.

[HiloDon]

Hi Nick

The Mallincam video CCD camera does not stack the image internally. The images are captured at 30 FPS NTSC or 25 FPS PAL but the electronic shutter remains open for the duration of the exposure just like a traditional astronomy CCD camera. I have demonstrated this many times on NSN by showing with tracking off the trailing shows a solid line and not a dashed line which is what you would get if the camera was stacking internally.

Chris A

Astrogate

Hi Chris,

I always wondered how these integrating video cams worked. If I understand it correctly, video recording at 30 fps can record each frame at 1/30 sec or less and that's what you see. Essentially real time. If you use an integration time of say two seconds, doesn't it have to record 60 frames and sum them somehow? Then new frames are added and the old ones dropped at the rate of 30 fps. If I'm right, then aren't the frames stacked or summed as Nick suggested?

Maybe a tutorial as Shirva suggested would be a good idea in a different thread.

Thanks,

Don

[nytecam]

Hi all,  I am just starting out in this forum and learning about video electronically assisted observing. I have been using my lodestar (originally purchased for long exposure imaging) and lodestar Live to capture some really nice images real-time at the scope. With the coming addition of stacking in LodestarLive it seems we have something akin to video imaging? Being completely ignorant about astronomy video cameras like the Mallincam I don't really understand the advantages and disadvantages of either setup. What are the fundamental differences between this lodestar live setup and Video Cameras like the Mallincam? 

Thanks  

Rob

Hi Rob - glad you're enjoying your Lodestar experience.  The difference between astro-video and astro-CCD imaging is minor but inevitably biased by the user and in the description of their system ...and the other   

My take on the subject ...

Video needs a separate power source for the camera plus a monitor with its power source to view results. The camera draws addition power if cooled [Peltier cooler]. The camera has internal circuitry to control brightness/ sharpness etc - the monitor also can do some of these things too. Video uses "sens-up" to stack video frames @ 50c or 60c [depending on mains supply] and video system [PAL/ NTSC] to create longer exposures.  The power source to the camera is "on" during sensup and [may] add amplifier glow artefact to the displayed image. 

The Lodestar is powered/ controlled by s/ware and images displayed on a PC/laptop via a USB connection - there is no need for other hardware or power souces.  Lodestar draws a tiny current with minimal heat build-up. There's no amp glow artefact as the power source is "off" during the exposure.   Supplied SX Lodestar s/ware is old but fully functional with powerful filters for pixel binning/ light pollution/ sharpness etc but has limited options used on-the-fly.  LodestarLive s/ware does a better job on-the-fly but has few subsequent filters.

[DoctorD]

Hi Chris

Look what missing a comma or two can do to the meaning of a sentence!

What I meant to say was "Both video cameras, such as the Mallicam, and the Lodestar use sensitive CCD imaging devices..."

I did not meant to suggest that the Lodestar could be used without a computer, rather that they both shared the same or similar CCD technology.

I think that the Mallicam, like the SDC435, separates the exposure from the read out rate - as you say the shutter remains open for a length of time which can be greater than the readout rate (25 or 30 fps), the camera reads out the last frame captured until a new frame has been completely exposed. This is further complicated by the signal processor which may average a number of frames, on the SDC435 this is known as SSNR (Noise reduction), which in my can effectively stretch the exposure time of the SDC435 to 20 or 30 seconds despite the Sens-Up( integration) only allowing x512 or about 10s for a PAL camera. Is there a similar control on the Mallicam?

The wonders of modern electronics!!

Clear skies

Paul

[RobertI]

My first 'hot' post!!  I'm glad it wasn't such a daft question after all!!

[nytecam]

Forgot to add ....the Lodestar is fully digital [no analogue/digtal conversion or visa versa involved with image degrading]  to 16-bit.  Video is 10/12 bit [please advise!].  Lodestar exposure is a single entry from 1/1000s - hours [sX s/ware] displayed in a video-like loop.  All video/CCd exposures are limited by LP/scope tracking accuracy.  Video commonly use a PC/laptop for addition s/ware to tweak image/ for use to broadcast [via dongles] and share images via the internet. 

[Astrogate]

HiloDon, on 09 Jul 2014 - 01:13 AM, said:

Hi Chris,

I always wondered how these integrating video cams worked. If I understand it correctly, video recording at 30 fps can record each frame at 1/30 sec or less and that's what you see. Essentially real time. If you use an integration time of say two seconds, doesn't it have to record 60 frames and sum them somehow? Then new frames are added and the old ones dropped at the rate of 30 fps. If I'm right, then aren't the frames stacked or summed as Nick suggested?

Maybe a tutorial as Shirva suggested would be a good idea in a different thread.

Thanks,

Don

Don and Nick

I sent an email to Rock Mallin regarding this discussion and here was his response.

Chris,

Last Friday I demonstrated live on NSN while a satellite went through the visual area of  M27 where a vertical streak was left by the satellite. I explained to all about why is was a vertical streak. MallinCam Video CCD cameras use a open shutter not frame stacking. Just like a imaging CCD camera the MallinCam use a full open shutter for the duration of the exposure selected.

 If a 30 frame per seconds as suggested would be used, a vertical line would of been resulted broken up in small section displaying the frames. It was not so. MallinCam Video use a open shutter just like a normal imaging cameras for astronomical purpose.

 Output of the camera is maintained at 30 FPS for NTSC and 25 FPS for PAL. so communication and SYNC is maintained at the monitor level to display a image.

Rock

[Astrogate]

Hi Chris

Look what missing a comma or two can do to the meaning of a sentence!

What I meant to say was "Both video cameras, such as the Mallicam, and the Lodestar use sensitive CCD imaging devices..."

I did not meant to suggest that the Lodestar could be used without a computer, rather that they both shared the same or similar CCD technology.

I think that the Mallicam, like the SDC435, separates the exposure from the read out rate - as you say the shutter remains open for a length of time which can be greater than the readout rate (25 or 30 fps), the camera reads out the last frame captured until a new frame has been completely exposed. This is further complicated by the signal processor which may average a number of frames, on the SDC435 this is known as SSNR (Noise reduction), which in my can effectively stretch the exposure time of the SDC435 to 20 or 30 seconds despite the Sens-Up( integration) only allowing x512 or about 10s for a PAL camera. Is there a similar control on the Mallicam?

The wonders of modern electronics!!

Clear skies

Paul

Thank you for the feedback Paul

Cheers,

Chris A

[Astrogate]

nytecam, on 09 Jul 2014 - 03:34 AM, said:

Hi Rob - glad you're enjoying your Lodestar experience.  The difference between astro-video and astro-CCD imaging is minor but inevitably biased by the user and in the description of their system ...and the other   

My take on the subject ...

Video needs a separate power source for the camera plus a monitor with its power source to view results. The camera draws addition power if cooled [Peltier cooler]. The camera has internal circuitry to control brightness/ sharpness etc - the monitor also can do some of these things too. Video uses "sens-up" to stack video frames @ 50c or 60c [depending on mains supply] and video system [PAL/ NTSC] to create longer exposures.  The power source to the camera is "on" during sensup and [may] add amplifier glow artefact to the displayed image. 

The Lodestar is powered/ controlled by s/ware and images displayed on a PC/laptop via a USB connection - there is no need for other hardware or power souces.  Lodestar draws a tiny current with minimal heat build-up. There's no amp glow artefact as the power source is "off" during the exposure.   Supplied SX Lodestar s/ware is old but fully functional with powerful filters for pixel binning/ light pollution/ sharpness etc but has limited options used on-the-fly.  LodestarLive s/ware does a better job on-the-fly but has few subsequent filters.

Lets not forget though that the Mallincam Xtreme has an intelligent built in TEC cooling system which works by detecting a noise level. The Lodestar guide camera does not have any cooling system therefore when using this camera for near real-time observing you will notice a lot of hot/warm pixels and more noise.

Chris A

[HiloDon]

My first 'hot' post!!  I'm glad it wasn't such a daft question after all!!

Hi Robert,

Not a daft question at all. I've been playing with this "video" stuff for about a year now and am learning something new every day. Your original question about the Lodestar and Lodestar Live is right on. Before I got my Lodestar X2 I was interested in getting one of the "video" cams. I saw Nytecam's work with his Lodestars and was convinced that was the way to go. I purchased one and couldn't be happier (except if they come out with an X2C). The Lodestar coupled with the LL s/w achieves the same goal as a "video" cam. I put video in quotes because for DSO's it's not really real time video. The video cam can be viewed directly with a TV monitor in NTSC or PAL. The Lodestar needs a computer. If you want to view the video cam on the computer, you need an analog to digital video capture device. As Nytecam points out the video cam needs more wires. A power feed, a control wire and an output wire that will have to connect through a video capture device if you want to capture images or broadcast them. The Lodestar has one wire that does it all. I also noticed that the Lodestar produces images that have round stars and no amp glow. There are no scan lines either that I see in some video cam images. Even though the Lodestar has no cooling, use of the dark frame subtraction in LL makes a clean image. Paul is working on a stacking routine that will help as well.

Paul's LL s/w has both windows and Mac versions. The Lodestar X2 has the Sony 1/2" ICX829 sensor that has the highest sensitivity of any of these near real time cams. Someone please correct me if I'm wrong on that. The Lodestar X2 has opened up a whole new world for me and it's ease of use helps me to set up in minutes. I've been viewing the Hickson Compact Groups of galaxies recently with my 4" refractor and am amazed how easy it is to see them on my computer. Here is a link to some of my captures:

http://stargazerslounge.com/gallery/member/36930-hilodon/

Thanks much to Nytecam and Paul for their efforts.

Don

[RobertI]

Don,

Some very nice captures in your gallery, you must have had some fun observing sessions!

For your information I sent an enquiry starlight Xpress about the possibility of a colour Lodestar X2 and apparently there will be one in the next month or two.

Rob

[nytecam]

Fabulous deepsky results HiloDon via your 4"frac+Lodestarx2+LL - much darksky envy

As you say LL copes very well with Lodestar hot pixels via its darks subtraction in the brief exposures we use.  TEC [Peltier coolers] seem more necessary with videocam which, according to some forum posts, seem to get warm or hot and some reference to an added cardboard 'insulator' behind sensor of the uncooled entry MC Micro videocam.  By comparison the Lodestar is 'cool' to the touch.  Maybe it's a climate thing - what night temps do you get in Hawaii?

I've spoken to Ian King [of I K Imaging - SX dealer] in the past and he thinks the Lodestar-C a great little camera but would be better for long exposure imagers with TEC but no movement from SX on this - news of Lodestar-Cx2 should appear soon is good !  

[RobertI]

I've spoken to Ian King [of I K Imaging - SX dealer] in the past and he thinks the Lodestar-C a great little camera but would be better for long exposure imagers with TEC but no movement from SX on this

Is this because of the reduced sensitivity of the colour chip, or are there other factors at play?