planetaries from last night

[shirva]

lodestar does stacking via lodestar live, the lodestar is a fantastic camera that has been made better via computer manipulation to enhance it more,taking it from a sensitive guide camera to a very comprehensive video camera with lodestar live,

most cameras have been modified to do video astronomy,starting from webcams to webcams with lx upgrade moving to cctv cams with factory fit filters removed to make them better for astronomy work,,guide cameras with computer software,,,microscope derived cameras with computer software.

its changing all the time.

[shirva]

Hi Guys - thanks for the generally positive response. Yes - I'm using the basic SX s/w that came with the camera and most settings are done auto like darks/flat/contrast stretch so all finished in a few seconds eg a fraction of the typical exposure time. Some blue bloat from FR @ f/3.27 but I can live with it.Carl's remarks remind me of a photo-film class I attended decades ago where the lecturer remarked that his client complained his pix were too good! His response was "what do you want me to do - kick the tripod?". Must remember that Carl on the next session;-) BTW - gave up astro-video decades ago - too many wires, mess and technically inferior.Back on track - here's the remaining Lodestar DSO grabs from the session egNGC 7076=Abell 75 = PNG101.8+8.7 [90s]- inordinately faint PNe m[P]17.0 with central m18.0 star clearly recorded ! Field goes down to m19.1 [Wikisky].NGC 6926 [5s] - very bright pretty blue PNeNGC 6826 [20s] - pretty open clusterEnjoyNytecam

so are you saying that you dont do video astronomy,,just for clarity for the members.is it electronicaly assisted astronomy you are posting,

[Carl Reade]

Thank you its not hostility is seeking clarification, however Nytecam has summed it up nicely in a single sentance which is good enough for me.

[Macavity]

So what constitutes Video Astronomy... the (deprecated?) "Astro Video"... and 

"EAA"? Cheerfully though... I thought they were all pretty much the same thing?

[shirva]

to me,,eaa is anything with a electronic component in place of or as an eye piece.

dslr,astrophotography camera ,,,would they post here of course not ,,,this is video,,,so we put dslr in video setting and it produces live video,,same goes with a astrophotography camera unless you use a piece of software to manipulate it into doing video in live or near live viewing,,this in my opinion would be a hybrid system,,,but would fall into video..

so you take a frame from video and post it unprocessed,,its a frame of video

take same frame and post process it in photoshop ect..its an image

in my opinon nothing wrong with showing video frames that have been processed as an image ,would clarify things if we could see the video footage it came from and how it progressed from a video frame to the finished processed image.

[shirva]

just now there is no clarity in what is and what is not VIDEO,so all views are relevent and no rights or wrongs so to speak,the admin would have to take on merit what is posted and decide if it fell in to the correct board,there would of course need to be a moderator up to speed on the use of video equipment and the latest tech,im not shure if this board has a dedicated video astronomer moderator.

[Martin Meredith]

Video is variously defined as the "system of recording, reproducing, or broadcasting moving visual images on or from videotape" or "an electronic medium for the recording, copying, playback, broadcasting, and display of moving visual media". If this is the definition of video astronomy then I'm happy to state categorically: I don't do video astronomy. Most objects I like to look at show no apparent motion within the course of an observing session, so what would be the point of limiting myself to what is demonstrably sub-optimal technology to achieve these goals?

It saddens me that a few members genuinely seem to believe that we should be defined not by our shared love of astronomical observing on the night but instead by our use or otherwise of a certain specific form of image acquisition (and yes, video is imaging too). 

It is perhaps only an accident of history that this forum is not called CCTV astronomy and then we might be able to put this "debate" into perspective. 

Martin

[shirva]

yeah correct up to a point martin

,right up to the bit you say you dont video moving objects,,, i take it you use a tracking mount other wise you would have star trails, so we are moving something or we would be doing a video cruise,,,,, this wasnt a dig just as nobody else was having a dig, it was about what is the perception of video astronomy, it may even have been called webcam forum.

the context of the comment from was carl saying it wasnt video and maurice confirmed himself that he didnt do video,i took it as he was doing eaa and posting an image, so is this a video forum.

i think this was the question carl was asking.

[JamesF]

I struggle to see that there is any quantifiable difference between video astronomy and EAA that doesn't split hairs so finely as to be useless.    The principles of the underlying technology are near identical in either case.

For me what sets either apart from more "traditional" imaging is perhaps the intent that it's actually an interactive process at the time it takes place, but I'd be surprised if everyone shared that view.  Be that as it may, if people wish to post stills or video sequences from their observing sessions it's all good stuff as far as I'm concerned.  I'd say there's far more common ground between video astronomers and other "electronically assisted observers" than there is between the latter and someone like, say, Olly or Sara.

James

[Stub Mandrel]

>BOGGLE<

What is it about a video camera that makes people so touchy?

The OP clearly says they are stacks with darks and flats, but looking at the numbers just three or four subs grabbed with a video camera.

I can't hack along time at the eyepiece, I'm quite keen on looking at video as it seems to offer both the opportunity of seeing things live in good detail AND imaging on a budget.

[stash_old]

For me the difference is EAA is a real time (or as near as)  frames of video that improve as the "video camera" stacks the frame data. There is , for me at least, no post processing as I would like to see "real time" video not frames that have been processed with PS/Gimp or anything else.

That said there is nothing wrong with anyone processing frames of data using whatever software but I think the point was there is an existing outlet for Imaging photos especially one that have been post processed.

Yes the dividing line is small (and getting smaller/confusing as camera's do more post work) and you can do as you like but put it under the correct category and for me its under imaging.

I do not count screen prints of video as imaging just an easy way to showing what was being seen in the real time video.

In the end we all love Astronomy but we are coming from different angles. 

Off now to visit our clubs dark site and do some real looking - visual only - clear skies to ALL.

[shirva]

well said stash-old.. imaging has its catagory.

stub mandrel.. as maurice said he dosent do video.. his own words..

james f.. olly and sara would be regarded imagers but they use eaa as they use electronic equipment to capture there views of the night sky,

martin gave the definition of video in an earlier post,,so when we make a frame an image its an image created by eaa and processed like other astrophotography image.

as i said earlier it would be nicer if the video the image came from was posted we then have a comparison between cameras and scopes used,it does not come down to who can post process the best with the best spec software and computers,,purely the live or near live video.

i do agree post produced images look stunning but we are under the video section not imaging.

[RobertI]

Personally, I believe that if an image is a capture of what was seen during the observing session, then it's ok to be on this forum. Just my opinion.

As an aside, I find it ironic that on Cloudy Nights, a very large number of posters are Mallincam users yet their forum is called EEA!!

(Sorry to lengthen the debate Nytecam, back to your posts, PN6926 looks interesting, I will have to give that a go).

Rob

[shirva]

I gie up.

[Stu]

Gentlemen, there is simply no need for this debate to be happening.

In the imaging forum, there is everything from my crass attempts with an iPhone, to Olly and Tom's 400 hour image of Orion, a vast range of techniques and quality.

There is nothing wrong with nytecam's post, it appears to me to be in the spirit of video astronomy with auto darks etc rather than extensive post processing.

This sub forum is for all aspects of video astronomy, if you want to post up live video, post up live video, but please allow others to enjoy the forum and post up their work too without continually debating whether it is video astronomy or not.

It does not have to be limited to entry level £50 cameras and simple mounts, we would like to see the full range of technologies and capabilities on the video forum, just as we do in other areas.

Now, back to nytecam's post.....

[Spacedout]

I think the main point of Carl’s questioning here seems to have got lost a tad.  Are these images a screen grab from a session or are they screen grabs that have also been post processed?  Maurice said that “most settings are done auto” so it’s a little unclear to me but if it’s just a screen grab then no drama.  Can someone please clarify?  I do not own a Lodestar so I do not know what to expect though perhaps this is exactly what you see on the fly? 

I do not believe there is hostility with this questioning but more frustration.  No one here can argue that posts of actual video in this forum are very few and far between and I can’t see why requesting this would be seen as an attack.  Surely in a forum entitled video astronomy one can expect to see a little bit of video now and then?  That is not to say I do not post (unprocessed) screen grab images of said video as I do but, I at least try to have an even balance of still images and video.  I sometimes wonder what a newbie thinks when stumbling upon our little forum expecting to see some nice pretty videos.  I understand not everyone wants or has the means to record a session and post it but just a little on occasion would be nice J 

The Lodestar camera has been around a while now and I have never once seen a single video from it.  If such a video exists then I would genuinely be very interested to see it.  I’m sure the SX cameras and software are a lot of fun but without seeing them in action from a recorded demo or live broadcast I find it difficult to decide if it’s for me or not.  When Atik released their video of the Infinity and then followed up with a live broadcast I was extremely impressed and I’m sure if SX did the same I’d expect to see something similar.

All that said, at the end of the day whilst we all have different methods and views of VA/EAA I believe we all pretty much have the same goal - amazing views in as near real time as we can get and in a very simple manner so why these squabbles break out is beyond me.

As for the VA/EAA debate, I guess this is down to each person’s take on what video astronomy actually is.  For me VA is about seeing amazing views on a monitor produced by my telescope and cameras either live or in as near live time as possible.  Then (and the reason I still like to call it video) I like to share these views with as many people as possible with live broadcasting or by posting a recorded video of the event.  I’m not bothered if it is a video camera or an imaging camera with clever software just as long as I get great views in a simple manner and at a speed I’d deem acceptable to broadcast.  As far as I’m concerned if someone is watching my video stream or recorded session they are watching video astronomy.  

[shirva]

hi karl.

it may be a better idea if this post was removed and a new thread started on the subject if you feel it needs clarified.

we have diverted away from nytecams original posting and its not deemed fair to hijack the post

davy

[Spacedout]

Davy, are you winding me up!?  You have had your say on this post 11 times total and most of which seemed to make things worse!  My post at least was trying to say lets be friends.  Wow I am simply staggered!!

[shirva]

trust me on this.....playing solomon

or click back on menu to the first video astronomy sub forum and read the description of the forum

[Stu]

Gentlemen, enough is enough. I shall lock this thread now.

For the record:

Video Astronomy

A board dedicated to electronically assisted observing and imaging.

That seems to cover what Maurice is posting.

Spacedout, Davey was actually acting in a cooperative manner after we had shared pm's. Please do not start or continue these debates on other people's threads, it is not a courteous way of contributing to the forum.

As I have said, there are many different interpretations of video astronomy, as long as the OP is open with their methods then where is the problem?

If you wish to see live video posted up, why do some of the more experienced members not just simply post video up and stop causing issues?

Thank you.