Jupiter blurry when using Barlow [Help needed]

[Archonom]

Hi there,

I am still new to amateur astronomy and astrophotography. I recently took my first steps towards moon and Jupiter photography.

While I am satisfied with my moon pictures, I am struggling with Jupiter. I am a bit desperate, so I hope that maybe someone good give me a couple of useful hints so I can learn and improve.

 

When shooting Jupiter without any barlow lense or eyepiece, I manage to get a sharp picture and am actually reasonably satisfied with the results (see attachments named "ok..").

I use Firecapture to shoot something like 3000 single images (mostly JPEG because I had issues with other formats.. maybe this is one of my first mistakes) and stack them afterwards. When recording AVI movies with Firecapture and dissecting them to single pictures afterwards, my results are less sharp than taking photos, so I sticked to recording images instead of movies.

When the image is stacked, I continue with editing using Registax. After tweaking around, I obtain a sharp image of Jupiter as a result. 

 

Now to my issue:

I want to obtain bigger images from planets, especially Jupiter, and therefore bought a premium 3x barlow lense. I tested it on the moon and was very satisifed when comparing the view (and images) to my cheap 2x barlow lense. So I think I managed to see the difference and I think that the new barlow lense does quite well.

 

When putting the ASI ZWO cam into the barlow lense and shooting Jupiter, the effects of the seeing increases (as I expected) and the image starts getting more noisy, but the single frames I see within Firecapture are still ok (at least that is what I think, maybe I am wrong there). I play around with the values for gain and shutter speed, select the Jupiter profile and start shooting (max. 180s because of Jupiter's rotation, I receive around 20 - 50 FPS, depends on the shutter speed, ofc).

After 3 minutes, I receive between 2000 and 4500 single JPEGs, depending on my settings. Of course I know BMP or TIFF should be better, however I often have issues with Firecatpure's BMPs/TIFFs when putting them into pre-processing software such as Pipp.

I pre-process, stack and edit my images and then still have a blurry Jupiter in front of me (see attachment, images named "stack..").

No matter what I do and how I tune the settings within Registax, Jupiter won't become any sharper when using the stacks which were recorded through my 3 x barlow lense.

Could this be because of my recordings (bad image format, not enough frames..)? Do I need more frames when recording through a barlow lense?

Or can't I do any better under the conditions of my site (see below)? Are there any tricks when recording through a barlow, do I need other settings or shall I use another software?

I attached the stacked image ("stack6_raw.tif") and am curious if someone could get more out of it. For me, this tif looks like the stacked pictures of the small Jupiter pictures, and I managed to get them sharper. So I wonder if it's me or if I simply can't expect more when using a barlow lense? If so, how can I shoot bigger and sharper pictures of Jupiter then (without having to switch my telescope, I know that my Newton is not the "planet killer").

 

I am greatful for all hints!

 

My equipment and software I use:

• EQ6-R Pro with GoTo
• 8" inch Newton (200PDS 200mm 1000mm f/5)
• 3x Premium Barlow
• ASI ZWO 290 Color and cooled
• Recording: Firecapture
• Preprocessing: Pipp (Planetary, output in TIF)
• Stacking: Autostackert 3
• Editin: Registax6

My site:

• Germany
• Small town, lots of light pollution, but it's still "ok"
• Mid - strong seeing on most days

stack6_raw.tif

single_stack6.tif

single_small_jupiter.tif

[bottletopburly]

Try recording the smallest field of view in firecapture you can get too much black area captured  ,this should give you better FPS ,maybe reduce gain slightly so the white areas don't blow out too bright ,use the auto guide feature in firecapture ,try to capture at least 3k frames ,uses SSD  if possible this will help as it will be able to keep data flowing and not dropping frames ,i use a 200p so no problem with your scope 

[newbie alert]

The trade off for fl is seeing.. if you plug a 30mm ep and get a great sharp image,then do the same with a 6mm you won't get anywhere near a sharp image..and due to its elevation at the moment the seeing won't be that great and good conditions are needed for imaging planets,ie jetstream  needs to be well out of the way for steady seeing..target high in the sky 50 degrees and near or on opposition  (9th may) for full illumination.. in the last 2 years I can recall only 1 night where seeing was outstanding and I wasn't imaging ..felt at the time there be another night (wrong!)

Don't compare what you see Damien,Christopher and Avani are doing.. different conditions to the uk..plus they've got years of experience behind them,but soldier on as position wise jupiter/Saturn are only going to get worst..NB a ADC could help 

[Archonom]

Sorry to reply that late!

 

@bottletopburly:

Wow, that's an awesome picture. Thank you for your advise. I already reduced the image size (during live recording) and have a SSD in my notebook, but I guess I can have a look at the live scanning function of my AV..so you say: More frames within 3 minutes will help me producing sharper images? Will try to achieve more frames and report back.

 

@newbie alert 

Thanks for your comment! What do you mean by "NB" and "ADC"? 

[newbie alert]

1 hour ago, Archonom said:

Sorry to reply that late!

 

@bottletopburly:

Wow, that's an awesome picture. Thank you for your advise. I already reduced the image size (during live recording) and have a SSD in my notebook, but I guess I can have a look at the live scanning function of my AV..so you say: More frames within 3 minutes will help me producing sharper images? Will try to achieve more frames and report back.

 

@newbie alert 

Thanks for your comment! What do you mean by "NB" and "ADC"? 

It's a atmospheric dispersion corrector ..this should help explain better..

http://skyinspector.co.uk/atm-dispersion-corrector--adc

[newbie alert]

I wouldn't do 3 min videos as you will definately get rotation smear and hyper amounts of data..

[Archonom]

Thanks. So how long should a video of Jupiter be?

I always take pictures, not videos. Is that "bad"? If I take videos, the stacked result seems to be of worse quality than the result of stacked images.

[Merlin66]

Try with around 500 to 1000 frames in an AVI ( Or SER ) video.

use Auotstakkert to select the best quality frames and stack them. This gives you a TIFF file output.

Then process this image in Registax to finish.

 

[bottletopburly]

26 minutes ago, newbie alert said:

I wouldn't do 3 min videos as you will definately get rotation smear and hyper amounts of data..

2.5k-3k frames not minutes 

[Owmuchonomy]

Following on from @Merlin66 try to limit your capture time to under 90 seconds for Jupiter. Longer than this and it becomes necessary to use de-rotation software such as Winjupos. Search YouTube for tutorials called ‘Lucky Imaging’.

[Archonom]

Thanks guys! Appreciate your input.

 

Will try again this night and see if I can get better results now. 

[Freddie]

I don’t agree with the times suggested given the scale of your images. At that scale you are not going to have the resolution to capture fine detail and therefore rotation is not going to be an issue with 2-3 minute captures. 90 secs is often quoted as a limit but often no account is taken of the kit being used.