Jump to content


Photo

Jupiter Dec 1st Decent UK seeing at last!

  • Please log in to reply
14 replies to this topic

#1 Space Cowboy

Space Cowboy

    Apollo

  • -----
  • Posts: 1025
  • Joined: 30 May 2010
  • Loc: Cheshire, UK

Posted 02 December 2012 - 01:34 PM

After some pretty lousy seeing over the past few weeks and missing out on a couple of good nights I finally bagged a decent shot last night. Seeing was about 6/10 but quite pleased with the resulting image.

Taken at 23.29 GMT f26 @30fps Auto Dob 250 & DFK. AVI run through PIPP quality selected before stacking in AS!2.

Posted Image

Posted Image

#2 Az Frank

Az Frank

    Surveyor 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 1735
  • Joined: 18 Oct 2008
  • Loc: Tucson Arizona

Posted 02 December 2012 - 05:50 PM

Excellent Stuart! Caught the small red spot nicely!

#3 DesertRat

DesertRat

    Fly Me to the Moon

  • *****
  • Posts: 5174
  • Joined: 18 Jun 2006
  • Loc: Valley of the Sun

Posted 02 December 2012 - 07:54 PM

Great results Stuart! I'm a little surprised at the Pipp step. AS!2 does a pretty good job selecting frames in my experience. Possibly you had some malformed frames or the planet got cutoff at the edge in a few frames, I used Pipp once to handle that. Well done!

Glenn

#4 Andy_L

Andy_L

    Sputnik

  • -----
  • Posts: 36
  • Joined: 14 Nov 2011
  • Loc: York, UK

Posted 03 December 2012 - 01:59 AM

Cracking Shots! The seeing was only average here in Yorkshire Saturday night but it was still great to have a couple of hours under the stars for a change!

#5 Space Cowboy

Space Cowboy

    Apollo

  • -----
  • Posts: 1025
  • Joined: 30 May 2010
  • Loc: Cheshire, UK

Posted 03 December 2012 - 06:44 AM

Thanks Frank & Andy!

Cheers Glenn! I know what you mean about AS!2s ability but I have seen an improvement when the avi has been "polished" by PIPP first. Maybe it just helps AS!2 perform more efficiently? There were alignment cracks when using box 50 but after using PIPP this did not happen. Maybe its just a placebo effect??

#6 karlo

karlo

    Viking 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 932
  • Joined: 21 May 2009
  • Loc: Yorkshire,UK, BLIGHTY !!

Posted 03 December 2012 - 06:54 AM

well done Stuart !

#7 Space Cowboy

Space Cowboy

    Apollo

  • -----
  • Posts: 1025
  • Joined: 30 May 2010
  • Loc: Cheshire, UK

Posted 04 December 2012 - 04:32 AM

Cheers Karlo!

#8 MvZ

MvZ

    Surveyor 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 1577
  • Joined: 03 Apr 2007
  • Loc: The Netherlands

Posted 04 December 2012 - 06:20 AM

Excellent image, especially for a 10".

An AP size of 50 sounds really small to me - but I'm not sure of the original recording size, it is smaller than this, right? Have you tried using a size of 100 and just let AS!2 handle the quality estimating part? It would be interesting to see the differences.

>There were alignment cracks when using box 50 but after using PIPP this did not happen. Maybe its just a placebo effect??

It could be that the very bad frames were thrown out, those that might cause AS!2 to have some problems with the likely too small AP size. But I still believe the small AP size is probably not the best idea in the first place.

#9 Mike Phillips

Mike Phillips

    Soyuz

  • *****
  • Posts: 3501
  • Joined: 21 Feb 2006
  • Loc: Swift Creek, NC - 35.682 N, 78.743°W

Posted 04 December 2012 - 10:44 AM

I love the colors and balance! Nice is an understatement

#10 Space Cowboy

Space Cowboy

    Apollo

  • -----
  • Posts: 1025
  • Joined: 30 May 2010
  • Loc: Cheshire, UK

Posted 05 December 2012 - 07:06 AM

Thanks Mike!

Cheers Emil! Yes I do allow AS!2 to analyse the frames before setting the alignment points on the 1st quality selected frame. When seeing is good I use box 50 which gives me about 50 alignment points (sorry forgot to say these are 1.5x drizzle). If seeing is below average I use box 100 as 50 usually produces cracks on poorer data. So you are saying there is no advantage using more (smaller) alignment points even on good data? I use auto alignment too btw.

I have to say normally I don't use PIPP before AS!2 but with good data I sometimes try it.

#11 MvZ

MvZ

    Surveyor 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 1577
  • Joined: 03 Apr 2007
  • Loc: The Netherlands

Posted 05 December 2012 - 07:35 AM

> So you are saying there is no advantage using more (smaller) alignment points even on good data?

Not really. Generally speaking those small AP sizes are not that good on Jupiter. But if you have a really small Jupiter and/or very high signal to noise ratios, then 50 might actually be quite big. I was trying to generalize that 50 is always bad. It's not, it depends on many things.

Whay you should do to properly test it out, is just try to place the APs manually like shown in this image: http://www.astrokraa...info/jup_ap.jpg

And just play around with the sizes a little bit. First create a stack of AP size 100, then one with 75, then one with 50. And finally carefully compare them (this is not easy!). Do the same for the blue and green channels, as especially blue is often a bit more noisy and requires larger AP sizes.

Even though images with smaller APs might look sharp, they might be not as sharp as they could have been with larger APs.

#12 Space Cowboy

Space Cowboy

    Apollo

  • -----
  • Posts: 1025
  • Joined: 30 May 2010
  • Loc: Cheshire, UK

Posted 05 December 2012 - 09:23 AM

Thanks Emil your advice is much appreciated! Interesting looking at your alignment example I see every point is far away from Jupiter's limb?
Thankfully being a user of the colour DFK I don't need to worry about the RGB channels. :)

#13 MvZ

MvZ

    Surveyor 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 1577
  • Joined: 03 Apr 2007
  • Loc: The Netherlands

Posted 05 December 2012 - 10:00 AM

Yeah, I don't like the limbs. The information you want AS!2 to track on is actually inside Jupiter, not outside. So usually it is better to place the APs not too close to the edge.

Imagine that you used small APs right on the edge of Jupiter. AS!2 basically tries to minimize the difference between the current image and a reference image. But with a small AP, the compared images are relatively small and are more or less divided by an almost straight line (because the AP is small, the edge hardly looks curved any more) with the planet on one side, and black space on the other side. If you try to minimize the difference between these two images, the effect that the almost straight line has is really big. Any offset right ALONG this line sounds like a good deal to AS!2, the contrast inside the planet is much lower, so that won't contribute nearly as much as the division between the black space and Jupiter. Imagine the division being slightly warped by the seeing - which happens all the time - and AS!2 will put way too much emphasis on getting the slightly curved line back in what it thinks is the right place.

So in the end you can be sure to end up with a very sharp edge of Jupiter, but close by just on Jupiter it might actually be rather blurry. It perfectly tracked along the line, but did not really pay too much attention on what was going on inside Jupiter. You might not notice this at first, but when one blurry AP and a sharp AP meet, there is a chance of some small seem artifacts occurring. So not only is there a chance the image is more blurry in certain places, it can actually introduce some small artifacts in others.

It is impossible to predict what will happen when AS!2 stacks. A lot depends on the seeing conditions, but generally speaking bigger APs and placed a bit away from the edges are a better idea than many small APs all over the edge.

#14 karlo

karlo

    Viking 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 932
  • Joined: 21 May 2009
  • Loc: Yorkshire,UK, BLIGHTY !!

Posted 05 December 2012 - 01:50 PM

mmm very interesting

#15 Space Cowboy

Space Cowboy

    Apollo

  • -----
  • Posts: 1025
  • Joined: 30 May 2010
  • Loc: Cheshire, UK

Posted 05 December 2012 - 02:20 PM

Very interesting indeed!Thanks again Emil I shall try your suggestion.






Cloudy Nights LLC
Cloudy Nights Sponsor: Astronomics