Plate solving and framing in NINA

[Desmond]

Hi,

I failed again...
Missed the Rosetta Nebula despite being hooked up to NINA and trying to place solve and frame.

The issue is, I'm not quite sure what to expect.

I did upload an image to astrometry.net and use the legacy survey to get this:

That's the kind of thing I would like to see in NINA after a plate solve, but I'm not sure how to make that happen.

Any help would be much appreciated

Thanks!

 

[The Lazy Astronomer]

Which plate solver are you using in NINA? And how are you setting the target in NINA? I've always found it to work absolutely flawlessly, with targets slap bang in the centre of the frame.

[dark knight]

Hmm, i too use nina and dont have problems, the plate solve does its thing, then repeats until the target is slap bang in middle of the sensor. Have you checked your camera pixel size is correctly entered in nina? Also there are settings for adjusting how accurate the plate solve and framing interacts, check these too. Another thing have you set the plate solve to sync to your mount after it does a solve so your mount knows exactly where its pointing, then reslew to target via ninas target sky chart or your planetarium software, Then platesolve again.

Edited March 17, 2021 by dark knight

[dark knight]

You can check if ninas plate solve is synced to your mount by looking at the plate solve coordinates and compare those with what eqmod is saying, if they are different then the mount is not really pointing where it thinks it is.

[Clarkey]

I've never had a problem with NINA and plate solving either. I think the advice from Dark Knight above about checking all the settings is definitely worth following. Also, when you start an imaging session take a couple of over-exposed 'snapshot' images to confirm everything is right before leaving NINA to do its thing.

[ollypenrice]

Is it really necessary to plate solve? I've done thousands of hours of imaging and have never used it.  Like all things IT, it's wonderful when it works and a royal pain and unnecessary complication when it doesn't. The Rosette is very easy to identify in a finder or on a quick image because of the bright stars of the central cluster (NGC2244) which look vaguely like the 6 pattern on a domino.

Olly

Edited March 18, 2021 by ollypenrice

[Desmond]

I was not using NINA to drive the mount, just to try to verify my targeting.

Seems like I should look into using NINA for driving the mount too.

Some more learning to do, but thanks for all the advice here - much appreciated!

 

[CraigT82]

6 minutes ago, Desmond said:

I was not using NINA to drive the mount, just to try to verify my targeting.

Seems like I should look into using NINA for driving the mount too.

Some more learning to do, but thanks for all the advice here - much appreciated!

 

You definitely need NINA to drive the mount for the plate solving to work properly. Once it takes that first plate solve image and calculates how far off target it is, it will then command the mount to move to the right spot and solve again, and again, as many times as necessary to get onto target (as described in the framing tab), before starting the sequence. No prior star alignment is necessary at all other than PA. Just start from the mounts parked position.

I have it set to a pointing precision of one arcmin and it usually takes two solves/moves (1 minute max) to get on target.

I set it to 0.5 arcmin once and it took too long to get to the right spot so went back to 1 arcmin precision.

Once it works properly you will never look back! It also means that consecutive nights imaging are all framed the same way and you need to crop very little of the stacked image. 

[david_taurus83]

1 hour ago, ollypenrice said:

Is it really necessary to plate solve? I've done thousands of hours of imaging and have never used it.  Like all things IT, it's wonderful when it works and a royal pain and unnecessary complication when it doesn't. The Rosette is very easy to identify in a finder or on a quick image because of the bright stars of the central cluster (NGC2244) which look vaguely like the 6 pattern on a domino.

Olly

Not needed but if NINA is setup correctly, it does it anyway so doing a 3 star alignment is pointless. Even with a 3 star alignment, the various QC of your average mount setup each night on a tripod doesn't always centre targets in the frame. But I do take your point. It's handy to be able to do it the hard way as well!

 

[Desmond]

Brilliant.

I'll use the eternal cloud cover to get the mount setup with NINA and try again

 

[dannybgoode]

2 hours ago, ollypenrice said:

Is it really necessary to plate solve? I've done thousands of hours of imaging and have never used it.  Like all things IT, it's wonderful when it works and a royal pain and unnecessary complication when it doesn't. The Rosette is very easy to identify in a finder or on a quick image because of the bright stars of the central cluster (NGC2244) which look vaguely like the 6 pattern on a domino.

Olly

Depends - I can barely see the main stars of Orion such is the light pollution in my garden so yes, to frame most DSO's plate solving is pretty much essential.  And to be fair of all the things that go wrong during an imaging session I don't think I have ever had a problem with plate solving.  Loads of other stuff goes wrong, some of it my fault and some of it just because computers are a PITA, but plate solving is the one thing that has been utterly reliable for me .  It just works.

 

[ollypenrice]

3 hours ago, dannybgoode said:

Depends - I can barely see the main stars of Orion such is the light pollution in my garden so yes, to frame most DSO's plate solving is pretty much essential.  And to be fair of all the things that go wrong during an imaging session I don't think I have ever had a problem with plate solving.  Loads of other stuff goes wrong, some of it my fault and some of it just because computers are a PITA, but plate solving is the one thing that has been utterly reliable for me .  It just works.

 

Yes, agreed, but my point is that it wasn't working for the OP who possibly didn't need it anyway. We don't know what mount he has but many can be driven to object co-ordinates on the handset, either by inputting them as user defined objects or just by looking at present RA and Dec values while slewing. When I'm imaging an object not in my mount's handset (or when I'm working on a mosaic with panels planned for various different positions) I just have the co-ordinates noted on a bit of paper and drive to them. My mounts aren't ASCOM compliant so I can't use the regular plate solving products, the plus side being that the internet and its updates cannot sabotage them! 

Olly

Edited March 18, 2021 by ollypenrice
Typo

[dannybgoode]

1 minute ago, ollypenrice said:

but many can be driven to object co-ordinates on the handset, either by inputting them as user defined objects or just by looking at present RA and Dec values while slewing

Yep - agree with most of what you have said; particularly trying to troubleshoot without having full knowledge of the gear etc.  The problem with the above though - I can do that with my mount however it is often quite a long way off target and so I still miss, have to spend time re-framing, take another test sub etc when plate solving has it done in a matter of a minute or two to an accuracy I couldn't hope to repeat.  I don't use ASCOM either rather INDI so no issues there  .  

But yes, there are plenty of ways to skin this particular cat and one man's meat etc...

[Desmond]

The mount is a Skywatcher AzGTi which I setup using the app on my phone. I realise it's not a great mount for photography, but it was never intended for that. I originally wanted it for visual, but fell into photography after seeing what can be achieved.
So, I'm pushing the limits of the mount (I don't yet run it in EQ mode as I'm still too slow with PA at the moment).
So the idea was (and it may well be a misguided one...) that I would do star alignment, target using mobile Stellarium, then plate solve to check accuracy.

I think, having read this thread so far, that I should rethink that flow and use NINA for everything...

Need time to setup and test that though

Thoughts always very welcome!

Thanks all.

[ollypenrice]

8 minutes ago, Desmond said:

The mount is a Skywatcher AzGTi which I setup using the app on my phone. I realise it's not a great mount for photography, but it was never intended for that. I originally wanted it for visual, but fell into photography after seeing what can be achieved.
So, I'm pushing the limits of the mount (I don't yet run it in EQ mode as I'm still too slow with PA at the moment).
So the idea was (and it may well be a misguided one...) that I would do star alignment, target using mobile Stellarium, then plate solve to check accuracy.

I think, having read this thread so far, that I should rethink that flow and use NINA for everything...

Need time to setup and test that though

Thoughts always very welcome!

Thanks all.

Just a thought but are you sure that this plate solving software can work in Alt Az? 

You'd really be a lot better off using it in equatorial mode for imaging.

Olly

[Desmond]

No to be honest - I'll have to test that.

I just managed to get the mount and NINA connected and to slew to a target so some progress at least

I'll have to try it out once the clouds clear and see how I get on.

👍