Three Planets - Three disappointments :-(

[Stub Mandrel]

EDIT: - Looking at the pics, this seems  a bit of wallowing in self-pity - they aren't bad and I would have been delighted a year ago, but having seen that I can do better on Saturn and Jupiter, and really hoping for SOME detail on Mars under what looked like perfect conditions... At least the colours are lovely!

With a huge moon in the sky I thought I'd have a serious night of planetary imaging. I stayed up for Jupiter on the 20th and left everything protected by bin-bags so I could have a shot at Saturn and my first serious attempt on Mars. For Jupiter I got over 18,000 frames - enough for PIPP to fill my HDD and too many for AS!2 too recognise! Similar amount of video for Mars and Saturn. Seeing was really good - for all three, with the images pretty steady on screen. I know focus was spot on, because I used a  Bhatinov mask and Regulus for Jupiter. I just used the rings for Saturn and Mars, but when I checked at the alarmingly named Dschubba after capturing Mars with the mask it was still spot on.

I spent more time than ever before trying to get a good balance of exposure (short) and brightness (not too high).

That then leaves 'transparency' - I know there was thin cloud, because the moon was surrounded by pale glow. It looks like this was very poor, because for all my efforts, these are not my best results and Mars in particular is very disappointing. Saturn was only a fraction of a degree higher in the sky, and due to a chimney stack I did it before Mars, I suspect the light cloud may have thickened.

After it taking nearly a whole day to transfer the files to my PC, I'm a bit gutted. I thought at the time I had pretty much perfect conditions, and thought stacking and sharpening would bring out exciting detail, but in fact the stacked images are little better than the raw video, except for Saturn which was rather noisy. I wonder if I should use more brightness and even shorter exposures?

I will go back over things, and try stacking shorter runs of video, especially for Jupiter, as rotation will have smeared details (the one below is 15 minutes) but here is progress so far:

 

 

 

 

[xtreemchaos]

you hit the nail on the head Neil, if you had low cloud it will wash the details out, and the more frames the more washed out it will be, yer id try less frames, but all in all there good images, just the conditions let you down. thanks charl

[Stub Mandrel]

20 minutes ago, xtreemchaos said:

you hit the nail on the head Neil, if you had low cloud it will wash the details out, and the more frames the more washed out it will be, yer id try less frames, but all in all there good images, just the conditions let you down. thanks charl

You're right Charl. I just stacked the first 90-seconds of Jupiter and I can see it's better. I'm going to try processing each set of frames on its own and choose the best ones.

[Stub Mandrel]

Yes Charl... you are very right:

 

[Stub Mandrel]

OK, I'm a bit happier now.

I've taken Charl's advice and focused on shorter runs of images. Mars is still disappointing though:

 

 

[laudropb]

They are definitely not that bad.

[xtreemchaos]

glad you have sorted them Neil, thay have turned out very good.well done, mars is a tricky one at the best of times,if you didnt have the high cloud you would of had much better details,the next clear night you should have another go. thanks charl.

[Stub Mandrel]

Thanks Charl,

Clear Outside is changing every few hours at the moment but as soon as I get a chance!

[Pete Presland]

You are entitled to feel how you like about your images, it is what drives a lot of imagers on to improve. That said you can only work with the conditions you are given. The Jupiter and Saturn are not too bad, but the Mars is not so good. I am sure things will improve. 

[StargeezerTim]

Very nice images... I've learnt myself this week that sometimes less is more. When I got Pipp to estimate quality and saved 3000 instead of 3600 frames, and got AS!2 to stack 60% of them, the resulting image was much better.

I didn't know Saturn and Mars were about... must have a go myself.

 

[happylimpet]

Mars in insanely far south so I really wouldnt beat yourself up about that!

Thin cloud, in fact, makes no difference to image quality except to reduce the possible frame rate which, with smaller apertures, makes freezing the seeing harder. Ive seen near perfect images taken through considerable cloud.  Its more likely to be bad seeing either locally or at altitude thats to blame. Local seeing means thermal issues in the scope and heat rising off neighbours roofs etc.

I do like your Jupiter (down the thread) a lot though.

Also, not sure why AS!2 cant handle over 18,000 images? If giving it AVI/SER videos Ive given it 50,000 frames before. I dont think there is a limit. Maybe there is when dealing in separate images.