10th September: Best images yet but how do I improve clarity/detail?

[Mark2022]

The late evening/early morning of the 9th/10th September was spectacular in its clarity. I don't remember seeing such a calm, majestic canopy of stars in years/decades. It really is dark here (well a Bortle 3/4) and I looked up and, without sounding like a ****, I 'saw God'. The stars really were like a blanket of diamonds on a velvet background and, even though Saturn was low in the sky, the conditions were so perfect (you really had to be here - bright meteors and artificial damned satellites everywhere) that I, luckily, have improved my technique a little to be able to capture Saturn, Jupiter and the moon again. This time, in crisper detail than before (though I still have a long way to go to achieve the quality I'm looking for). I've only started a few months back and only had 2 real sessions with my Meade LX10 8 inch and an SVBony 305c. The Meade is still forked but is in full operating condition. I've collimated the scope as best I can (see video) but I have no electronic focuser and I'm not using any software of any kind  to focus. I use the Meade's original focuser to achieve rough focus and then I use an SVBony helical focuser which replaces the visual  back at prime focus OR, if using my F6.3 reducer/corrector it screws onto that and then the SVBony camera direct into the helical focuser or into a Meade 2x barlow (sometimes a Neewer 3x barlow) then into the focuser. When using the helical focuser, the slightest turn is all that is needed to achieve best focus. What I tend to do is ramp the gain up on AstroDMx capture software (I use a mac and SVBony so AstroDMX is the only software which accepts both), focus as best I can on the moons, turn the gain back down and the  videos taken were taken at around 10 - 12ms. However, I have been taking videos of approx 3 mins, sometimes 4 mins.

The detail  and  clarity I'm  trying to achieve is in this video.... 

How do I get from the quality of these shots....

....to the quality of that video?

I realise it's hard work and also realise it's harder to do manually but I'm getting video quality captures of the same quality as he is in  the video. To process, I use Pipp and  the Astrosurface (which is similar to Autostakkert and Registax in one package).  I just can't seem to nail that focus although, again, the actual captures appear to be of the very same quality (if not better) than the video capture in the video above.

Suggestions and advice very welcome.

[ONIKKINEN]

First of all, your Jupiters here are above average for an 8'' scope, in fact i think they are pretty good. I would be content with those with my 8 inch newtonian. The Saturn images suffer from Saturn's low current elevation for us here in the north, so the issue is mostly out of your hands. We can also see that there is clear colour separation in them, which is due to the low elevation. You could get an ADC to try and fight this, but the low elevation will still be a major issue.

I see from your location that you are fairly up north if the Scottish border was where you took these images, and i also see that the video you linked is taken from sowewhere in the US (not sure where, channel just says US as location, but certainly further south than Scotland). Saturn at the moment is very low in the sky for us northern imagers, and most of the images will come out looking like yours here (but i still think yours are good!). Jupiter is a bit better positioned, but still its not ideal with how low in the sky that is. The video example is most likely taken when Jupiter was a good 10-20 or more degrees higher in the sky, which is a huge deal. Seeing plays a major role the further north one is because there is simply more atmosphere in the way to ruin the sharpness, so you need to get very lucky with seeing to get the same results as someone who images from a southern location. Realistically that means that very good sharpness is quite rare and not something you should expect more than a few times a year( if that, depends on location though). I have certainly never seen quality like in the video from my location of 60N with my own scope, even when seeing appeared to be very good.

There are other things you could do other than try and get lucky with seeing though. First you should not use the 3x barlow since that goes way too far in the oversampled territory, and in fact so does your 2x barlow. Ideal sampling for planetary imaging can be approximated to roughly: ideal f_ratio = pixel size in microns x4 which for you would be f/11.6. Not everyone (probably most dont) follows or cares about this "guideline" but it gives you an idea of where to head in terms of the barlow needed. If i were you i would use a weak barlow placed very close to the sensor to get a lower magnification (the shorter the distance between the barlow and sensor the lesser the magnification, except with telecentric barlows) By the way using Autostakkert!3 for stacking is very important here, since it uses a special type of debayering method which is able to recover the detail lost to the colour filter array and so does not suffer any sharpness loss compared to mono (at the cost of reduced SNR, but worth it). Older planetary stackers do not use this so the pixel size x4 for colour cameras is not quite right. Anyway, AS!3 is the best there is so should be used either way.

For the focus thing you might want to get a reduced focuser, like a crayford with a 10:1 reduction gear or similar. I have seen people also do a MacGyver version of this like in this Dylan O'Donnell video:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?app=desktop&v=MNShJXKiRDE

Personally i focus with the same gain as the intended imaging gain. I just rack focus in and out repeatedly to see where the sharpest spot is, and try to leave it there. Its not too difficult to do with a 10:1 reduced crayford, but it still takes some time. If seeing is bad then it takes quite long because the focus point shifts all over the place (but in these cases the end result is typically not very good). In the best possible focus i am typically seeing one or more of Jupiter's moons blink in and out of existence with the seeing, and outside this focus they are seen less often or not at all.

Oh, and i cant usually tell from the quality of the recording if the end image will turn out good or not. I have had only one night where the recording looked good too, and that turned out to be the best image i have gotten with my scope, but these nights are probably less than 5% of the nights im out with the scope so not something i am holding my breath on.

[Mark2022]

Espoo? I used to visit there often in the 90s to meet the Nokia people (Oulu too). Thanks for the feedback. Extremely annoying though to think I'd be lucky to get the quality I'm looking for. I'll certainly take on board some of your suggestions however. I do think the software deals with the RGB alignment sufficiently to negate the need for the ADC however, unless I'm wrong. I realise Saturn, as low as it is, is going to suffer and, to be honest, I'm quite pleased with the results given that. Jupiter is at least 60deg however but, no matter what, I just seem to be able to tease out the tiniest more detail on each session until now but still feel the focus is not right. I never realised, at 'infinity' that focus could  still be so critical.

[ONIKKINEN]

3 minutes ago, Mark2022 said:

Espoo? I used to visit there often in the 90s to meet the Nokia people (Oulu too). Thanks for the feedback. Extremely annoying though to think I'd be lucky to get the quality I'm looking for. I'll certainly take on board some of your suggestions however. I do think the software deals with the RGB alignment sufficiently to negate the need for the ADC however, unless I'm wrong. I realise Saturn, as low as it is, is going to suffer and, to be honest, I'm quite pleased with the results given that. Jupiter is at least 60deg however but, no matter what, I just seem to be able to tease out the tiniest more detail on each session until now but still feel the focus is not right. I never realised, at 'infinity' that focus could  still be so critical.

Espoo is basically Helsinki suburbs, on the southern coast. Anyway for the ADC, you may want to read this: https://skyinspector.co.uk/atm-dispersion-corrector-adc/

And this graph from that page in particular is certainly a nice TLDR:

And we can see here that Saturn will be bad at any altitude for this year and the next few years. Jupiter is ok, but could be better. Using an ADC will sharpen the individual colour channels themselves, which does more than just align the colour channels so it would certainly sharpen the results considerably. Most of the planetary imaging heavy hitters use one for sure.

Focus has to be more than perfect, cant stress that enough. This is probably where you can improve the most if you figure out a way to increase the turning radius of your focuser to create a DIY reducer.

[Mark2022]

The focusing issue with the LX10 is why I bought the SVBony helical focuser which is equivalent to vastly increasing the turning radius. An ADC is not on my 'horizon' at the moment but will be if I can achieve improvement first on the focusing. Cheers.

[StevieDvd]

Your data is seemingly quite good. Having seen the difference between initial video and final image processed & tweaked from others, I'd say it's the learning of the tweaking that is all that you need to improve.

Have a look at this video - it shows the tweaking in action. 

[Kon]

My two cents worth based on having a very basic 8" Dob setup(similar aperture to what you have). I am all manual, tracking and focusing, no upgrades on crayford the box stanrd one speed, no ADC...you get the picture 😉.  I have given up on OSC Saturn but I am getting nice sharp in IR. For Jupiter we are blessed this year, it is quite high up so atmosphere is a bit less of an issue. Firstly, I collimate my Dob before every capture and I do a star test. Focus, I try to get sharp details on the planet, I never focus on its moons. I might have to refocus after every capture. For Jupiter I do 120s captures (3-4 you are doing will smear the fine details due to rotation) and 180-240 for Saturn. Get as many videos as you can and deal later which are the best and derotate them. I aim for histogram of 50-60% and 5ms exposure. I adjust gain to hit the histogram values I want. Try to max your fps so capture at tight ROI.

Another important aspect is sampling. The rule of thumb is 5x the pixel size. I have an asi462mc/mm with 2.9 pixel so I need to be at f15; my dob is f5 so I use 2.5TX powermate that brings me to f15. Under excelent seeing you can go to f20 but unfortunatley I did not have the right one for the excellent seeing we had a few days ago.

Processing, I use combination of Registax with mild wavelets, Astrosurface and Imageanalyzer but it depends on the capture and conditions. What works for one day will not work for another. You need to find what works for you.

This is my recent Jupiter when I had that excellent seeing, so the 8" did deliver exceptionally well at f15 (5x120s derotation) but also another one when seeing was not so good. Keep imaging and hopefully get that good seeing moment.

Edited September 12, 2023 by Kon

[Mark2022]

Super shots Kon. I need to pick your brain further but it's late so perhaps catch up tomorrow.

[Mark2022]

22 hours ago, StevieDvd said:

Your data is seemingly quite good. Having seen the difference between initial video and final image processed & tweaked from others, I'd say it's the learning of the tweaking that is all that you need to improve.

Have a look at this video - it shows the tweaking in action. 

I'd like to hear from someone who has, at one point, had results like mine but has then done something (just one or two things) which has dramatically improved their images to (or near) Kon's results above. Someone must have gone through this improvement and knows what  was the one major factor to achieve it.

[Cosmic Geoff]

It's just attention to detail:  do the procedures other people did and check you have the right f-ratio, ADC for low planets,  accurate focus (check again if you disturb anything or the scope temperature changes), enough frames (I usually do 5000), and cross fingers for some decent seeing.  

A smaller ROI means you can up the frame rate, and increasing the gain means you can reduce the exposure.  Use the Sharpcap histogram to set a suitable exposure.

[Mark2022]

21 hours ago, Kon said:

My two cents worth based on having a very basic 8" Dob setup(similar aperture to what you have). I am all manual, tracking and focusing, no upgrades on crayford the box stanrd one speed, no ADC...you get the picture 😉.  I have given up on OSC Saturn but I am getting nice sharp in IR. For Jupiter we are blessed this year, it is quite high up so atmosphere is a bit less of an issue. Firstly, I collimate my Dob before every capture and I do a star test. Focus, I try to get sharp details on the planet, I never focus on its moons. I might have to refocus after every capture. For Jupiter I do 120s captures (3-4 you are doing will smear the fine details due to rotation) and 180-240 for Saturn. Get as many videos as you can and deal later which are the best and derotate them. I aim for histogram of 50-60% and 5ms exposure. I adjust gain to hit the histogram values I want. Try to max your fps so capture at tight ROI.

Another important aspect is sampling. The rule of thumb is 5x the pixel size. I have an asi462mc/mm with 2.9 pixel so I need to be at f15; my dob is f5 so I use 2.5TX powermate that brings me to f15. Under excelent seeing you can go to f20 but unfortunatley I did not have the right one for the excellent seeing we had a few days ago.

Processing, I use combination of Registax with mild wavelets, Astrosurface and Imageanalyzer but it depends on the capture and conditions. What works for one day will not work for another. You need to find what works for you.

This is my recent Jupiter when I had that excellent seeing, so the 8" did deliver exceptionally well at f15 (5x120s derotation) but also another one when seeing was not so good. Keep imaging and hopefully get that good seeing moment.

Hi Kon,

Ok, first things first: Collimation. I'd never collimated any scope before the night I took the attached pics above.  Here is a video of my attempt using Polaris, the helical focuser and a tri bahtinov mask.

 

 

The collimation beforehand was already good, I thought, and when I  started tinkering with it, it went way  out before I brought it back in.  However, never having attempted it before, I have no idea if the achieved result is good, bad or indifferent. I always brought Polaris back to the centre  of the eyepiece (the video is not of me actually doing the collimation since I did it with my SVBony zoom lens, first at  27mm then at 9mm). Looking at  the video, I can still see it may be a  fraction  out but I saw this during the collimation and sometimes it would appear spot on and other times, slightly out. However, with this result, if it were just ever so slightly out,  would that  make the difference between what  I'm achieving and what you are?

I have tried both:  Moons and Planet when focusing.

I've previously done just 2 minute captures and I've seen no improvement (or deterioration) but that could be because I'm not finely enough focused which, again, may be due to poor collimation? I have  no idea if my collimation is now good enough.

I have downloaded Winjupos which, I believe, is for derotation but have never used it so far. Is it possible it would result in me seeing a dramatic difference from what my results  are so far or does it only produce a minor improvement on already good data?

5ms? I started weeks ago at around 20-24ms. Someone recently said 10ms and now it's 5? Doesn't that then require increased gain and increased noise which then suggests increased capture time for better SNR?

Re the sampling: What I find is that, if I use my F6.3 corrector/reducer, the details seem to be improved however the disk is small of course. If I then do prime focus, that's quite good too (F10) but perhaps slightly less good. My SVBony camera is also 2.9 pixel. If I use my 2x barlow, I'm F20 and 3x F30.

Were you never at the point of getting results like I am? If not, then I guess you can't explain what single or couple of things you changed to make the dramatic improvement?

[Mark2022]

15 minutes ago, Cosmic Geoff said:

It's just attention to detail:  do the procedures other people did and check you have the right f-ratio, ADC for low planets,  accurate focus (check again if you disturb anything or the scope temperature changes), enough frames (I usually do 5000), and cross fingers for some decent seeing.  

A smaller ROI means you can up the frame rate, and increasing the gain means you can reduce the exposure.  Use the Sharpcap histogram to set a suitable exposure.

I  can't use Sharpcap for the moment (or Firecapture). I have a mac and an SVBony 305c. The only software which supports both is AstroDmx. However, it also has a histogram but I haven't got used to using the ROI function yet and the SW actually aborts quite often. 

I tend to use 640x480 and I keep thinking what would the resolution be like with 1920  because higher resolution means higher resolution, doesn't it?

[StevieDvd]

If you can attach the image after the stacking as a .fits or .tif perhaps someone can tweak it with PC (and hopefully Mac) software where the start & end result change can be explained for you to try.  I believe that ASIStudio is available for Mac it has stacking and some basic post stack options.

[Mark2022]

2 minutes ago, StevieDvd said:

If you can attach the image after the stacking as a .fits or .tif perhaps someone can tweak it with PC (and hopefully Mac) software where the start & end result change can be explained for you to try.  I believe that ASIStudio is available for Mac it has stacking and some basic post stack options.

If anyone fancies doing their thing with any of these, please do. 🙂 It will be very interesting to see what can be achieved and whether I'm just not good at processing! 

jupiter f6.3 prime focus__000006__00-17-01__data_pipp_____100r_48T_4234reg.tif jupiter f6.3 prime focus__000005__00-14-04__data_pipp_____100r_48T_5350reg.tif jupiter f6.3 prime focus__000004__00-10-39__data_pipp_____100r_48T_5454reg.tif jupiter f6.3 prime focus__000003__00-00-23__data_pipp_____100r_48T_4575reg.tif jupiter f6.3 prime focus__000002__23-55-26__data_pipp_____100r_48T_5157reg.tif jupiter f6.3 prime focus__000001__23-52-13__data_pipp_____100r_48T_3914reg.tif saturn prime focus__000002__22-53-34__data_pipp_____100r_48T_6738reg.tif saturn prime focus__000003__22-57-38__data_pipp_____100r_48T_2623reg.tif

[Kon]

17 minutes ago, Mark2022 said:

I  can't use Sharpcap for the moment (or Firecapture). I have a mac and an SVBony 305c. The only software which supports both is AstroDmx. However, it also has a histogram but I haven't got used to using the ROI function yet and the SW actually aborts quite often. 

I tend to use 640x480 and I keep thinking what would the resolution be like with 1920  because higher resolution means higher resolution, doesn't it?

I am a Mac user and I run everything under crossover.

[Mark2022]

9 minutes ago, Kon said:

I am a Mac user and I run everything under crossover.

Kon, some of us just aren't that tech savvy and don't have access to people who are.

[Kon]

24 minutes ago, Mark2022 said:

Hi Kon,

Ok, first things first: Collimation. I'd never collimated any scope before the night I took the attached pics above.  Here is a video of my attempt using Polaris, the helical focuser and a tri bahtinov mask.

 

 

The collimation beforehand was already good, I thought, and when I  started tinkering with it, it went way  out before I brought it back in.  However, never having attempted it before, I have no idea if the achieved result is good, bad or indifferent. I always brought Polaris back to the centre  of the eyepiece (the video is not of me actually doing the collimation since I did it with my SVBony zoom lens, first at  27mm then at 9mm). Looking at  the video, I can still see it may be a  fraction  out but I saw this during the collimation and sometimes it would appear spot on and other times, slightly out. However, with this result, if it were just ever so slightly out,  would that  make the difference between what  I'm achieving and what you are?

I have tried both:  Moons and Planet when focusing.

I've previously done just 2 minute captures and I've seen no improvement (or deterioration) but that could be because I'm not finely enough focused which, again, may be due to poor collimation? I have  no idea if my collimation is now good enough.

I have downloaded Winjupos which, I believe, is for derotation but have never used it so far. Is it possible it would result in me seeing a dramatic difference from what my results  are so far or does it only produce a minor improvement on already good data?

5ms? I started weeks ago at around 20-24ms. Someone recently said 10ms and now it's 5? Doesn't that then require increased gain and increased noise which then suggests increased capture time for better SNR?

Re the sampling: What I find is that, if I use my F6.3 corrector/reducer, the details seem to be improved however the disk is small of course. If I then do prime focus, that's quite good too (F10) but perhaps slightly less good. My SVBony camera is also 2.9 pixel. If I use my 2x barlow, I'm F20 and 3x F30.

Were you never at the point of getting results like I am? If not, then I guess you can't explain what single or couple of things you changed to make the dramatic improvement?

Your collimation looks fine and even If it's a tad off will not give you awful images. Regarding captures, seeing can really affect things. There have been instances that you see Jupiter boiling or like looking at it through water. Other times this doesn't happen but you can't focus on it due to atmospheric disturbance (assuming collimation is fine). Other times it boils but you can get some good focus. Unless you look at it at the screen it's hard to tell how the seeing is.

Regarding exposure most of us capture at 4-6 ms for Jupiter. Different story with Uranus or Neptune or UV/methane filters. As long as your histogram is around 50-70% you shouldn't have too much noise as you are stacking thousands of images. I usually have 25-30000 frames per capture. I stack 25-50% depending on the as!3 plot, where it drops below 50%.

 

Why are you using a reducer?

Winjupos will not rescue you if the captures are not good.

Finally, I did start with many bad images and awful processing but posting in the planetary imaging forum, I got a lot of good advice and it has hugely improved. I have only been doing this for 2 years. As long as you are open to criticism and trying things then you will improve. My advice is try different things in a session and see what has given a better result. This can be your starting point for next time. Same with processing,, try different software and find what works for you. And post your images and ask explicitly for feedback. I do it many times, even now. We can only improve, and SGL is super friendly. Even messaging some of the imagers here, they will help you. I have got plenty of help like this.

[Kon]

25 minutes ago, Mark2022 said:

If anyone fancies doing their thing with any of these, please do. 🙂 It will be very interesting to see what can be achieved and whether I'm just not good at processing! 

jupiter f6.3 prime focus__000006__00-17-01__data_pipp_____100r_48T_4234reg.tif 1.76 MB · 1 download jupiter f6.3 prime focus__000005__00-14-04__data_pipp_____100r_48T_5350reg.tif 1.76 MB · 0 downloads jupiter f6.3 prime focus__000004__00-10-39__data_pipp_____100r_48T_5454reg.tif 1.76 MB · 0 downloads jupiter f6.3 prime focus__000003__00-00-23__data_pipp_____100r_48T_4575reg.tif 1.76 MB · 0 downloads jupiter f6.3 prime focus__000002__23-55-26__data_pipp_____100r_48T_5157reg.tif 1.76 MB · 0 downloads jupiter f6.3 prime focus__000001__23-52-13__data_pipp_____100r_48T_3914reg.tif 1.76 MB · 0 downloads saturn prime focus__000002__22-53-34__data_pipp_____100r_48T_6738reg.tif 1.76 MB · 0 downloads saturn prime focus__000003__22-57-38__data_pipp_____100r_48T_2623reg.tif 1.76 MB · 0 downloads

I will take a look tonight. Are these after as!3? 

[Mark2022]

4 minutes ago, Kon said:

Why are you using a reducer?

Because I like to take a wide shot now and then of the planet and moons.

[Mark2022]

4 minutes ago, Kon said:

I will take a look tonight. Are these after as!3? 

No, they're just after Pipp. I have others which have been stacked with AS!3 however, if preferred?

[Kon]

1 minute ago, Mark2022 said:

Because I like to take a wide shot now and then of the planet and moons.

For high resolution images, try avoid the reducer so you can have the optimal sampling.

[Kon]

1 minute ago, Mark2022 said:

No, they're just after Pipp. I have others which have been stacked with AS!3 however, if preferred?

Even better.

[Mark2022]

7 minutes ago, Kon said:

As long as you are open to criticism

LOL. I'm my own worst critic anyhow! 😂

[Kon]

7 minutes ago, Mark2022 said:

No, they're just after Pipp. I have others which have been stacked with AS!3 however, if preferred?

The file seems tiff. Are these single frames?You should save the whole capture as a movie and allow as!3 to sort the best images.

[Cosmic Geoff]

I had a quick play with one of your Saturn files. I am not clear what you have done here, as I don't use PIPP for planetary at all in most cases.  I loaded it into Registax as if it was a file pre-processed in Autostakkert from a video.  The colour balance was awful, with hardly any blue.  I have sharpened it up a bit but it still looks bad.  Oddly there is hardly any noise.

TBH, given the likely value of the other gear involved, it would not be overkill to buy a used Win10 business laptop, and use it for image capture and processing. Then you can use all the popular astro programs, e.g  Sharpcap > .ser video > Autostakkert >tif > Registax.

If you reduce your ROI that will cut your raw file size, increase capture rate, and avoid filling your storage with data representing black sky.