Return to the Cloudy Nights Telescope Reviews home pageAstronomics discounts for Cloudy Nights members
· Get a Cloudy Nights T-Shirt · Submit a Review / Article

Click here if you are having trouble logging into the forums

Privacy Policy | Please read our Terms of Service | Signup and Troubleshooting FAQ | Problems? PM a Red or a Green Gu… uh, User

Equipment Discussions >> Video and Electronically Assisted Astronomy

Pages: 1 | 2 | 3 | (show all)
ccs_hello
Postmaster
*****

Reged: 07/03/04

Re: Why use video over CCD cameras for visual?? new [Re: mpgxsvcd]
      #5675041 - 02/12/13 12:14 AM

Video monitor also shines lights, not just computer monitor .

WiFi can be setup without Internet involved.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
mpgxsvcd
Carpal Tunnel


Reged: 12/21/11

Loc: Raleigh, North Carolina
Re: Why use video over CCD cameras for visual?? new [Re: ccs_hello]
      #5675073 - 02/12/13 12:42 AM

Quote:

Video monitor also shines lights, not just computer monitor .

WiFi can be setup without Internet involved.




Right and that is why nothing is allowed in some places.

Not sure how wifi without internet helps you get rid of the monitor for video viewing? Or am I missing something?


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
ccs_hello
Postmaster
*****

Reged: 07/03/04

Re: Why use video over CCD cameras for visual?? new [Re: mpgxsvcd]
      #5675403 - 02/12/13 08:39 AM

re: Not sure how wifi without internet helps you get rid of the monitor for video viewing?

Remoting the mount-side device is the key (thru wireless, e.g., WiFi.)


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
rmollise
Postmaster
*****

Reged: 07/06/07

Re: Why use video over CCD cameras for visual?? new [Re: mattflastro]
      #5675455 - 02/12/13 09:37 AM

If you want to find out, you might try actually using a Mallincam.

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
mpgxsvcd
Carpal Tunnel


Reged: 12/21/11

Loc: Raleigh, North Carolina
Re: Why use video over CCD cameras for visual?? new [Re: rmollise]
      #5675552 - 02/12/13 10:31 AM

Quote:

If you want to find out, you might try actually using a Mallincam.




I did. Not sure how to use it with wifi and without internet though? Seems pointless to hook it up to a computer with wires and then broadcast it to another computer that is not on the net.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
rmollise
Postmaster
*****

Reged: 07/06/07

Re: Why use video over CCD cameras for visual?? new [Re: mpgxsvcd]
      #5675740 - 02/12/13 12:25 PM

Quote:


I did. Not sure how to use it with wifi and without internet though? Seems pointless to hook it up to a computer with wires and then broadcast it to another computer that is not on the net.




I'm not sure what you used, but neither wi-fi nor Internet is needed to run a Mallincam.

If you want to broadcast over the Internet, you do need an Internet connection, but you can also record your images for later broadcast. Or just view them on the monitor, or record them for viewing later at home on a computer or big screen TV. You don't even need a computer to do that.

In any event, none of that has a thing to do with the cameras' hyper circuitry.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
mclewis1
Thread Killer
*****

Reged: 02/25/06

Loc: New Brunswick, Canada
Re: Why use video over CCD cameras for visual?? new [Re: mattflastro]
      #5675888 - 02/12/13 01:42 PM

Quote:

Simple and short question, what is in reality behind the Hyper circuit _name_ ? IT's just a name, but whatever circuitry bears that name could be groundbreaking or could be trivial. Until we find out, it's just another marketing name for an analog front end .



Matt,

Just a name for Rock's low noise, high gain exposure management system. It appears it's been used in one form or another on every Mallincam (with the exception of the Jr.) that offered more than the 128x 2.1s integration time. Interestingly that includes the new Universe camera which is not a video camera and therefore very different from the "traditional" Mallincam's. This "Hyper" circuitry has been one of the clearest benefits and differentiators over other similar video cameras.

The circuitry and it's capabilities have certainly evolved over time. The original Mallincam Hyper model offered 6 and 12s integration (and this seems to have been the first time the term "Hyper" had been used), then 7/14/28/56s with the Hyper Plus model. The VSS uses a pot instead of switches to change the amount of integration and offers a total of something like 140s. The Xtreme offers even better granularity and a longer total time (999 seconds which maybe an arbitrary limit from the wireless remote and PC software).

It's also interesting that he has increased the amount of integration at the request of his customers but his own interest clearly lies with less than 30s times. My assumption is that his video cameras remain optimized for integration times of something less than 60s but are obviously capable of far longer.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
rmollise
Postmaster
*****

Reged: 07/06/07

Re: Why use video over CCD cameras for visual?? new [Re: mclewis1]
      #5676030 - 02/12/13 03:06 PM

I have had excellent results with longer exposure times, as have other users. It's not so much a matter of them not being "optimum," so much as not being needed. 60-seconds will easily bring back scads of LEDA galaxies, and the camera is sensitive enough that over 30-second exposures begin to be problematical because of light pollution unless you are at a good dark site.

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
jambi99
sage


Reged: 08/14/10

Loc: Québec, Canada
Re: Why use video over CCD cameras for visual?? new [Re: nytecam]
      #5676370 - 02/12/13 06:01 PM

I already watched your gallery numerous time. Actually, thats what made me take the ccd route.

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
mattflastro
Vendor - Astrovideo Systems


Reged: 07/31/09

Loc: Brevard County , FL
Re: Why use video over CCD cameras for visual?? new [Re: rmollise]
      #5676542 - 02/12/13 08:30 PM

Quote:

I have had excellent results with longer exposure times, as have other users. It's not so much a matter of them not being "optimum," so much as not being needed. 60-seconds will easily bring back scads of LEDA galaxies, and the camera is sensitive enough that over 30-second exposures begin to be problematical because of light pollution unless you are at a good dark site.



Unfortunately that's almost an undestatement about light pollution .
I used to think 20 years ago that my Florida skies were light polluted because I couldn't see the Milky Way (except when hurricanes hit and power went out).
Now I think they're light polluted because I can barely see a few stars .
Now I _wish_ I could have those light polluted skies of 20 years ago .
Probably light pollution is one more reason to use video over visual .
Light pollution filters could be used to cut skyglow , in conjunction with longer integration times to bring in dim objects. Can't do that visually to the same extent as video.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
jambi99
sage


Reged: 08/14/10

Loc: Québec, Canada
Re: Why use video over CCD cameras for visual?? new [Re: mattflastro]
      #5676578 - 02/12/13 08:51 PM

Bingo...

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Jay B
super member
*****

Reged: 07/15/08

Loc: Richmond, Virginia USA
Re: Why use video over CCD cameras for visual?? new [Re: mattflastro]
      #5676784 - 02/12/13 11:17 PM

For the question above, I am experimenting with the DBK 618 imaging source camera. As soon as the weather clears, I will try it again, and I will try to post some examples of what I am able to get with this camera - in semi rural skys using a 9.25 celestron cpc.

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
jimb1001
sage
*****

Reged: 11/14/09

Loc: Florida
Re: Why use video over CCD cameras for visual?? new [Re: mattflastro]
      #5676928 - 02/13/13 01:26 AM

I find that just outside Tampa I can't use more than 15-20 seconds before the sky glow washes everything out.
Lots and lots of things to look at with 15 seconds, though.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
rmollise
Postmaster
*****

Reged: 07/06/07

Re: Why use video over CCD cameras for visual?? new [Re: jimb1001]
      #5677160 - 02/13/13 07:51 AM

Yep...15-seconds is my usual exposure here, but I can push it to 30-seconds - 1-minute in parts of the sky, so I guess I'm pretty lucky.

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
TimP
member


Reged: 02/24/09

Re: Why use video over CCD cameras for visual?? new [Re: mpgxsvcd]
      #5680245 - 02/14/13 09:26 PM

Quote:

Quote:

If you want to find out, you might try actually using a Mallincam.




I did. Not sure how to use it with wifi and without internet though? Seems pointless to hook it up to a computer with wires and then broadcast it to another computer that is not on the net.




The vast majority of Mallincam users don't broadcast on the internet. I no longer setup near visual observers unless there is a designated area for the video guys. Frankly I lost my patience with the faint and fuzzies in light polluted skies. I used to hear guys say " There you see it" I would always say, um no. Now since I started video observing I don't have to guess at what I'm looking at. There it is popping out of the screen in color. I have many ways to setup my observing for the night. I can opt to just hook my Vizio LED directly to the camera and use the buttons on the back of the cam to control it and share with my neighbors or I can setup my laptop. There is a learning curve but you will have that in almost everything you do.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
ccs_hello
Postmaster
*****

Reged: 07/03/04

Re: Why use video over CCD cameras for visual?? new [Re: TimP]
      #5680422 - 02/14/13 11:29 PM

I think the topic of
- where to place the display device (local or remotely),
- if viewed remotely, use wired or wireless method (e.g., coax cable, modulated analog video RF signal, long Ethernet cable, super-long USB extender cable, WiFi, etc.),
- how to get the video/image displayed on that display device <-- the signal format (baseband analog video, HDMI, SDI, USB, Firewire, packetized image format, etc.) and
- what type of display device to choose from (a video monitor, a TV, a large screen projector, a local laptop screen, the back of a digital camera --> its own tiny LCD screen, remotely seeing the images/video using another PC, smartphone, or iPad, or even broadcast it over the Internet and let many "watch" simultaneously.)

probably isn't what the OP was looking for in the first place.

All kind of combinations and many possibilities. And almost all of them can be applied to video or CCD imager one way or another, if you are creative .

Clear Skies!

ccs_hello


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
ccs_hello
Postmaster
*****

Reged: 07/03/04

Re: Why use video over CCD cameras for visual?? new [Re: mattflastro]
      #5680456 - 02/14/13 11:59 PM

Quote:

...
Now I think they're light polluted because I can barely see a few stars .
Now I _wish_ I could have those light polluted skies of 20 years ago .
Probably light pollution is one more reason to use video over visual .
Light pollution filters could be used to cut skyglow , in conjunction with longer integration times to bring in dim objects. Can't do that visually to the same extent as video.




To further drill down Matt's statement:
Probably light pollution is one more reason to use video over visual .

I think the desirable attributes are
- high gain imaging devices (I am not talking just the sensor itself, but the downstream signal chain, post-the-image-sensor),
- low noise (especially when the image system is in the high gain mode) and proper image processing to make the resulted (frequently updated) images visually appealing,
- need long exposure to gather enough photons, but not super long in which light pollution will ruin it,
- need "fast" telescope optics (including use focal reducer) to concentrate photon flux
- and maybe more secondary attributes, e.g. ease of use, even a caveman... , self-contained unit (one piece, two, three, four ... pieces), cost, leadtime, power consumption, higher spatial resolution, larger FoV coverage, high S/N, better customer service, more followers (less risks if market crashes), "device looks beautiful", (add more of your own wishes here) ...

There is no single product that can win out in all attributes. Heck, even some popular vendors here offer different type of devices for different needs.

I would just replace the word "video" with "Video and Electronically Assisted Technologies", as this forum's title says.
Probably light pollution is one more reason to use "Video and Electronically Assisted Technologies" over visual (visually observing).

P.S. apology to the Image Intensifier folks here. These have even higher gain than regular CCD based image devices thus long exposure (even 1 second accumulation) is not required.

Clear Skies!

ccs_hello


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
jgraham
Postmaster
*****

Reged: 12/02/04

Loc: Miami Valley Astronomical Soci...
Re: Why use video over CCD cameras for visual?? new [Re: ccs_hello]
      #5681049 - 02/15/13 10:08 AM

"I would just replace the word "video" with "Video and Electronically Assisted Technologies", as this forum's title says."

Exactly. I do quite a mix of visual, imaging, and camera-assisted observing from my red-zone back yard. (Naked-eye I can typucally see stars in the magnitude 3-4ish range.) On the camera-assisted observing side of things I just love how versatile is is, how deep I can go (down to around 18th magnitude using 60 second exposures), and how much detail I can see, all from the comfort of my house. However, the camera-assisted observing experience is still different than the visual observing experience and whereas I do most of my camera-assisted observing with a 6" scope I have a 16" and a 16.5" scope for visual. I also find that the two observing styles compliment each other wonderfully well. I have yet to see a camera of any kind that can capture the true colors and subtle (often very subtle) beauty of the true visual image, yet at the same time the camera-assisted image captures so much more detail it often tells me exactly where to look for details that visually I otherwise would have missed.

Neat stuff.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Rossmon
sage
*****

Reged: 07/09/10

Loc: Marin County, CA
Re: Why use video over CCD cameras for visual?? new [Re: mattflastro]
      #5686249 - 02/18/13 12:08 AM

You know, It sounds like there are some folks in this thread that really don't know much about video vs ccd imaging or at least they don't want to. The difficult science has already been spelled out for noobs to understand. Small chip big pixels, uber sensitivity. Big chip small pixels lower sensitivity. Some big CCD's can do binning, it helps but still not as sensitive. Time to stop considering, put your money where your mouth is, dream your own dreams, goodbye. I'm going outside to grab some nice colorful galaxies in 30s-60s without hardly trying. Hope your new equipment is the wise choice made after looking at more sites than this one. They are easy to find, Just look in most peoples signatures for the product names.

Rossmon to you


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
MRNUTTY
Carpal Tunnel
*****

Reged: 11/22/11

Loc: Mendon, MA
Re: Why use video over CCD cameras for visual?? new [Re: jambi99]
      #5692420 - 02/21/13 09:45 AM

Quote:


Don't get me wrong, i think the mallincam work very well. But for the price difference i just don't see the point. Also, i don't understand people that are so allergic to use a laptops on the field. You can get a decent small netbook with 9" screen for200$. Its about the same price has a good quality lcd screen and its about the same size. Plus,you can use the netbook for other stuff.






One problem with net books and the MallinCam is the program for MallinCam need 600 vertical pixels. Cheap net books all use a 1024x576 LCD. You have to scroll the MallinCam program up to get to the dialog button everytime use change something. Yucks! Otherwise, yeah cheap; I have four of them!


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Pages: 1 | 2 | 3 | (show all)


Extra information
0 registered and 10 anonymous users are browsing this forum.

Moderator:  csa/montana, JayinUT 

Print Thread

Forum Permissions
      You cannot start new topics
      You cannot reply to topics
      HTML is disabled
      UBBCode is enabled


Thread views: 3027

Jump to

CN Forums Home


Cloudy Nights LLC
Cloudy Nights Sponsor: Astronomics