Jump to content

Stargazers Lounge Uses Cookies

Like most websites, SGL uses cookies in order to deliver a secure, personalised service, to provide social media functions and to analyse our traffic. Continued use of SGL indicates your acceptance of our cookie policy.

sgl_imaging_challenge_banner_android_vs_ios_winners.thumb.jpg.803608cf7eedd5cfb31eedc3e3f357e9.jpg

smr

Mono or OSC, your suggestions

Recommended Posts

On 26/08/2019 at 00:06, smr said:

Just a slightly OT question... 

Is it better to shoot longer subs (4 or 5 minutes as opposed to 3) ?  Or should I leave the subs at 3 minutes with the histogram data where it is?

464524580_veilhistogram.jpg.8c0e51e10b1624d5b79c8682ffccdcdd.jpg

I would never answer a question like that from theory. All my decisions on sub length are based on experiment and vary from camera to camera. (30 minute subs are very productive in our Atik 11000 and pointless in our Atik 460, for instance).

Olly

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My 450D appears to have bricked itself.

It may be that this question is no longer academic for me...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

I'm no expert but there is little doubt that mono produces better detailed images and is quicker in the sense of comparable data but I think it has to come down to personal circumstances. Do you live somewhere with a lot of clear nights? Do you have to set up each time or do you have an obsy where it's set up? I have had my mono camera for a year and not completed an image and to be honest only had the opportunity to use it a few times. Weather up here is crap and mono would take me for ever to complete an image due to that. There's also being up early for work so regular late nights during the week aren't possible. I'm seriously considering going to colour with Triband filter. I just think I'd find it more enjoyable and I've had experience completing images with my DSLR.

Each to their own.

Edited by Rattler
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think that if speed is the issue then mono versus OSC isn't the right debate. It ought to be cooled CMOS versus the rest. I think CMOS will win.

Olly

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi all, i'm new to this forum and firstly just wow i'm blown away by how pleasantly different opinions are presented here.

I've spend some time on the cloudy nights forum and that just turns into a 'i'm right, you're wrong thread'.

I have a Celestron Edge HD and a william optics z73 and currently image with a modded canon 750D. I have bortle 4 skies. My biggest issue is noise and I have looked for months into a cooled dedicated camera.

Having seen results on the UK cloud magnets facebook page, I'm torn between the ASI 294MC, the 183MC and the 1600MM. I live on the coast and I have had 3 clear nights since June, and perhaps 6-7 since April/May.

As opportunity to image is limited and I like to be able to image one night then process and see results the next few days I am leaning towards the 294 and a dual/tri band filter.

I always see the argument of time to gather data as mono is at least three times the sequences e.g RGB, or Ha,O,SI, however does the increased sensitivity mean that you can take 3 times less frames?

I'm also just starting to get my head around pixinsight and worry that mono processing would be a step to far at this stage of my astro journey.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 27/08/2019 at 23:15, ollypenrice said:

I think that if speed is the issue then mono versus OSC isn't the right debate. It ought to be cooled CMOS versus the rest. I think CMOS will win.

Olly

Sorry for a delay in posting a reply.  Life and all.  But it is good to see where the thread has gone and it is all positive!.  I was not clear in stating OSC I was referring to CMOS cooled.  That is what I own and I have never used a modified camera OSC.  I also shoot narrow band with CMOS cooled an the results are really good.  Due to monsoons I have been unable to image for 2-3 months but tonight I might be able to get some time in.  Fingers crossed.  

For me, with a demanding job and loads of travel (with no possibility of an observatory due to HOA rules) I have not done the mono route.  Now, if I was home every night and had every night of the week as an option I might rethink.  But simplification of my setup to provide acceptable results is what I am looking for in this hobby. And everyone can make the hobby what they like and determine for their needs.  If someone wants to go all science-y by all means go for it.  But with my situation, there is a law of diminishing returns to get every little whisp of dust.  I usually spend a minimum of 7 hours on a subject with my 367C.  Mostly 10-12.  So I get plenty of detail.  And I have zero desire for IOTW or any of that stuff.  

Mono provides the utmost detail if you have the time for both imaging and processing....as well as the sky for it.  I only have the latter.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 27/08/2019 at 09:04, ollypenrice said:

(30 minute subs are very productive in our Atik 11000 and pointless in our Atik 460, for instance).

Its worth pointing out that theory would actually agree with that statement though.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 05/09/2019 at 20:23, Adam J said:

Its worth pointing out that theory would actually agree with that statement though.

That's good to know but does rather depend on whose theory you're referring to! I've spent more than enough time explaining why I sometimes use 30 minute subs on the Atik 11000 and have often been told I was wrong. This led me to avoid such conversations since I know from plenty of experience that I'm not wrong, at least when working with my data as I do work with it. If your theory says I'm right - I like your theory!

:Dlly

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, ollypenrice said:

That's good to know but does rather depend on whose theory you're referring to! I've spent more than enough time explaining why I sometimes use 30 minute subs on the Atik 11000 and have often been told I was wrong. This led me to avoid such conversations since I know from plenty of experience that I'm not wrong, at least when working with my data as I do work with it. If your theory says I'm right - I like your theory!

:Dlly

Well I suspect that there is only one theory but multiple interpretations of what people regard to be an acceptable signal to noise ratio.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bit late to this debate, and a lot of interesting ideas being put forward. Currently I think I will go from modded DSLR to cooled mono CMOS for deep sky. For planets, I do like OSC, especially for ones spinning as fast as Jupiter. I have managed to get decent shots of Jupiter using LRGB, but find OSC cameras like the ASI224MC much less of a hassle. On the moon too, in particular the terminator, mono plus filters doesn't work that well because the sun is either rising or setting on the crater rims.  That can give odd colours on those rims.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, michael.h.f.wilkinson said:

Bit late to this debate, and a lot of interesting ideas being put forward. Currently I think I will go from modded DSLR to cooled mono CMOS for deep sky. For planets, I do like OSC, especially for ones spinning as fast as Jupiter. I have managed to get decent shots of Jupiter using LRGB, but find OSC cameras like the ASI224MC much less of a hassle. On the moon too, in particular the terminator, mono plus filters doesn't work that well because the sun is either rising or setting on the crater rims.  That can give odd colours on those rims.

Listen to this man. I completely agree. I went from a DSLR to an OSC and am now realizing the capabilities of a cooled mono with filters for DSO's. I would still go back to an OSC for planetary or lunar work, but will always default to mono and filters for DSO's or solar. I will probably never go back to DSLR unless I want to piggyback a wide field shot using a camera lens.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, michael.h.f.wilkinson said:

Bit late to this debate, and a lot of interesting ideas being put forward. Currently I think I will go from modded DSLR to cooled mono CMOS for deep sky. For planets, I do like OSC, especially for ones spinning as fast as Jupiter. I have managed to get decent shots of Jupiter using LRGB, but find OSC cameras like the ASI224MC much less of a hassle. On the moon too, in particular the terminator, mono plus filters doesn't work that well because the sun is either rising or setting on the crater rims.  That can give odd colours on those rims.

Agreed, I found that LRGB was only worth it if you have really good data, also you need to put everything through WinJupos which can demand massive effort to achieve better results than OSC.

If I can get 5000~ frames of OSC the benefits are marginal, at best.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Stub Mandrel said:

Agreed, I found that LRGB was only worth it if you have really good data, also you need to put everything through WinJupos which can demand massive effort to achieve better results than OSC.

If I can get 5000~ frames of OSC the benefits are marginal, at best.

And I find WinJupos a right pain in the backside to use

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, michael.h.f.wilkinson said:

And I find WinJupos a right pain in the backside to use

It's that detailed user guide that makes such a difference (not!)

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.