Patrick
Postmaster
Reged: 05/16/03
Posts: 6788
Loc: Franklin, Ohio
|
|
Which is easier...planetary imaging or imaging faint fuzzies? I'm thinking of doing some planetary imaging because of the lengthy process of acquiring good DSO images. Am I kidding myself?
Patrick
--------------------
Discovery 10" f/6 Split Tube Dob
Celestron C6 SCT
Denk Binoviewers
AT66ED Refractor
Oberwerk Ultra 15x70 Binocular
475B Geared Tripod & 501HDV Head
Oberwerk 9x60 Binocular
Celestron Regal 8x42 Binocular
Canon 30D DSLR
Mini EQ1
My Astronomy Pages
|
Lunatiki
Pooh-Bah
Reged: 08/07/05
Posts: 1252
Loc: Amarillo, TX
|
|
I'd say planetary. Your tracking doesn't have to be exact and you can image in Alt/AZ. Light pollution isn't a factor. Much less time consuming too. It can be rather addicting though. One thing I love about it is you can have a complete ready to go processed image in less than 30 minutes from the time you start. Almost real-time updates of the planetary weather in our solar system.
--------------------
Mars Watch
All images taken with:
Celestron NexStar 8i SCT
DBK 21AF04.AS
K3ccd/Registax4/PSP8
ALPO Member #4287
|
iceman
Post Laureate
Reged: 03/07/04
Posts: 4357
Loc: Gosford, Australia
|
|
Hi Patrick.
I've dabbled in both, and both have their merits.
DSO takes longer to get going, but then you can automate it and set it to capture 2+ hours worth of exposures without touching it.
Planetary requires you to sit by the scope most of the time, looking for the moments of steadier seeing, changing filters, re-focusing, etc.
DSO's require nice clear, dark skies.
Planetary requires very steady skies with good seeing.
Processing of both types can take a long time.
The money pit of DSO's seems deeper than the money pit of planetary, but they're liable to make you open your wallet from time to time.
Conclusion? I don't know - it's personal preference.
I focus my energies on planetary, but when there's no planets visible, I do DSO's. Best of both worlds.
--------------------
Mike
. mikesalway.com.au - Astronomy and Photography by Mike Salway
. IceInSpace - The Australian Amateur Astronomy Community
. My Bio | My Jupiter 2007 Gallery | My Image Gallery
|
Lunatiki
Pooh-Bah
Reged: 08/07/05
Posts: 1252
Loc: Amarillo, TX
|
|
You don't necessarily have to mess with filters. In the long run, unless you have extremely steady seeing and transparency, the difference between monochrome and color isn't enough to notice in my humble opinion. I've also noticed lately the color of my Jupiters (DBK) pretty much mirrors the results from other users with monochromes (DMK). But, all the top imagers, like our Australian amigos use, use filters. Most likely not a coincidence.
--------------------
Mars Watch
All images taken with:
Celestron NexStar 8i SCT
DBK 21AF04.AS
K3ccd/Registax4/PSP8
ALPO Member #4287
|
Pete Gorczynski
member
Reged: 05/09/08
Posts: 22
Loc: Oxford, CT USA
|
|
You don't need a dark sky for planetary imaging. Capturing a video clip of a planet at the telescope is relatively easy process. Most of my time is spent at the computer processing the images. I can't say anything about DSO imaging, I never tried it.
Pete G.
|
FoxK
Carpal Tunnel
Reged: 11/07/07
Posts: 1800
Loc: Cape Cod, MA
|
|
Hiya Patrick
IMHO, planetary is MUCH more forgiving and easier than DSO's
--------------------
Orion 80mm ED Apo Refractor
8" Classic Dob (used as Newtonian on CG5 mount)
Meade 70-AZ-A 70mm Guider using PHD
LS60TCaK/B600/C
CG-5 Advanced GT Mount
Nikon D40x with T-Adaptors
Philips SPC900NC
Imaging Source DMK 21AU04.AS
Dome=the box my mount came in so I can see my solar images in bright sun lol
- click for cloud prediction for Plymouth, MA. area
|
rumples riot
Carpal Tunnel
Reged: 07/01/04
Posts: 2295
Loc: South Australia
|
|
This is my opinion and I know of one other top planetary imager.
To be a great planetary imager you need to overcome more hurdles and have far greater patience than DSO imaging. Seeing, cooling, did I mention seeing, predicting weather better than the fools at the weather bureau, processing are all part of this game and more so than DSO imaging.
My DSO kit cost just over 8000 and my planetary kit cost over 11,000. The DSO kit has a Tak TSA102, ED80, side by side saddles, DMK guide camera, cables and Cooled 40D. It takes nice images of DSO objects and is my lazy man's side to the hobby.
My planetary kit has C14, Superslim filter wheel, astronomiks filters, barlows, external hard drive for capture, specialised finder/guide scope and Lumenera Skynyx 2-0.
Added to this is the mount but that is used for both.
To get excellent DSO images you need a guided system with nice optics and skill in processing. To get excellent planetary images (see my website link below for some examples) you need to be a complete loon. I have spent more nights outside freezing my backside off and getting nothing for planetary than DSO. Added to this you really have to go to extremes of modifying equipment for cooling and then there is the processing. And did I mention the patience of a Saint.
Nothing is easy, anything that is hard to do will not be easy.
Sure you can plug a camera into a computer and then put the camera into a barlow and get some images of planets. However, if you want great images then this hobby requires more discipline than DSO imaging any day of the week. I think I know this pretty well.
--------------------
EARTH AND COSMOS
My Solar System Imaging BLOG
How to peltier cool a C14 SCT
SOUTH CELESTIAL POLE
|
InterStellarGuy
super member
Reged: 06/25/08
Posts: 113
Loc: Nebraska
|
|
Planetary imaigng is much much easier then imaging DSOs, first off as some have mentioned Light Pollution isnt a image for planetary. Also the CCD Cameras needed to image planets cost much less then those you would need for DSO imaging. Like the Celestron NexImage or Meade LPI, can get either for less then a hundred bucks.
It can be done also on a alt-az mouth, requires less exposure time and significantly less processing.
--------------------
--------------
Celestron C8
Celestron Nexstar 6SE
Celestron First Scope 114
Celestron Nexstar 60
Celestron accessory kit
Celestron UHC 1.25 filter
Celestron UV/IR cut off filter
Celestron NexImage
Meade DSI Pro
|
Patrick
Postmaster
Reged: 05/16/03
Posts: 6788
Loc: Franklin, Ohio
|
|
Thanks Paul, Mike and everyone!
I'll never be a top imager and I don't think it would be a good idea to spend all my retirement savings on imaging gear,  but I would like to be able to take a few decent images of Jupiter and Saturn.
A couple of question come to mind. First, is possible to get decent images even in my suburban light polluted area? Or is it better to be in dark skies...does it matter?
Second, is it better to have an EQ mount for planetary imaging or will a fork mounted SCT work just as well?
Paul, what are the obstacles that have caused you to get nothing for a nights work? Seeing? Equipment failure?
Thanks,
Patrick
--------------------
Discovery 10" f/6 Split Tube Dob
Celestron C6 SCT
Denk Binoviewers
AT66ED Refractor
Oberwerk Ultra 15x70 Binocular
475B Geared Tripod & 501HDV Head
Oberwerk 9x60 Binocular
Celestron Regal 8x42 Binocular
Canon 30D DSLR
Mini EQ1
My Astronomy Pages
|
rumples riot
Carpal Tunnel
Reged: 07/01/04
Posts: 2295
Loc: South Australia
|
|
Planetary and DSO can be obtained from a light polluted city. I live in a city of 1 million but we have such slack light pollution laws that it is equal to a city of 3 million.
Light pollution filters from Hutech make a huge difference to image DSO's in the city.
Now for Planetary, light pollution is not a real problem. Dark skies make for slightly better contrast but this can be overcome by some processing.
An EQ mount is nice for planetary imaging but you can do fine work with an alt az mount. If you keep to no more than 2 minutes then field rotation will not be an issue.
For me it is a matter of seeing conditions. I have probably around 17 nights a year where the seeing is around 7/10 or better. Equipment failure is not an issue these days. Good equipment makes for reliability.
Let me know if I can help further.
--------------------
EARTH AND COSMOS
My Solar System Imaging BLOG
How to peltier cool a C14 SCT
SOUTH CELESTIAL POLE
|
Sunspot
scholastic sledgehammer
Reged: 03/15/05
Posts: 990
|
|
I think it is pretty evident from the responses that one is really not easier than the other, just different with different challenges. I think you find what your passion is and pursue it. When you get comfortable with it, you make it look easier than it is. I would expect that if we watched the better performers in each area (Say Damian Peach for planets and Adam Block for DSO) they would make their specialty look "easy". On the other hand, switch their data and the final results would reflect the switch.
Having invested heavily into both DSO and planetary, I now have reverted back to planetary exclusively.
Just my 2 cents worth.
Paul
--------------------
Paul Maxson
Mewlon 250, Tak TOA-130, SolarMax 60, SKYnyx 2-0M
http://www.sunspot51.com
|
rumples riot
Carpal Tunnel
Reged: 07/01/04
Posts: 2295
Loc: South Australia
|
|
That is a good point Paul, placing each of those two guys into the shoes of the other and I am sure the images would look very much different.
--------------------
EARTH AND COSMOS
My Solar System Imaging BLOG
How to peltier cool a C14 SCT
SOUTH CELESTIAL POLE
|
David Rivas
Carpal Tunnel
Reged: 05/29/04
Posts: 2004
Loc: Lima, Peru
|
|
Hi Patrick,
Very intersting thread!!
I just wanted to add... Anyone can take planetary shots or DSO shots(if it's clear from any part of the world)... but to minimize (or avoid) the human error on them and get very good results, you need more skills and patience for planetary imaging. Extremely accurate focusing at very large image scales is often more diffult to achieve.
On the other hand, perfect (or at least good ) seeing conditions are rare (at least from my backyard) and crucial to get detailed planetary images. For DSO, you just need desirably dark skies ... Patrick, nevertheless I have seen very good DSOs shots taken from suburban locations so why can't you... processing can help a lot to minimize such bright skies(although a calm atmosphere is ideal, perfect seeing is not a must to get a pretty DSO shot)
Moreover, my humble experience has shown me that the ideal scenario to achieve pretty good DSO shots (that is, very dark skies) are very often very turbulent. While, foggy skies often (not always though) mean calm and pretty good seeing... so I guess you would have to travel to different locations unless you had wonderfully perfect skies "for both worlds".
At least, this is my opinion. So I agree with Mike and Paul in part.
Good luck!
David
|
Dave_s
journeyman
Reged: 06/14/08
Posts: 5
Loc: UK
|
|
Paul (Haese), just checked out your site and your images are jaw dropping. Are you sure you do not have a hubble squirreled away somewhere 
Dave
|
imjeffp
Senior Space Cadet
Reged: 09/30/03
Posts: 4427
Loc: Cedar Park, Texas
|
|
Quote:
You don't necessarily have to mess with filters. In the long run, unless you have extremely steady seeing and transparency, the difference between monochrome and color isn't enough to notice in my humble opinion.
I respectfully disagree.
As far as the original question--as near as I can tell, the only thing that DSO & planetary photography have in common is that they both require a telescope.
--------------------
Blog
ST80 • AT80EDT/LXD650
ETX-90/DS-2000 • 10" LX200 Classic ("The Quarter-Meter Telescope at the Heritage Park Observatory")
SPC900NC • DMK21AF04 • Digital Rebel XT
  
|
Lunatiki
Pooh-Bah
Reged: 08/07/05
Posts: 1252
Loc: Amarillo, TX
|
|
Comparing a SPC 900NC to a DMK camera is like comparing a mini-van to a Lamborghini. They shouldn't even be compared, apples and oranges. I always compare results from users with DMK images to those of my DBK images. With all things considered, I'd still affirm that you will gain some sharpness IF seeing is perfect and IF transparency is perfect when comparing a DBK to the DMK. Mike recently noted how well my DBK captured Jupiters colors, w/o being tweeked at all. One of these days I'll pony up some money and buy a DMK along with a filter set. I'm real curious and would like to do a comparison bewteen the two on the same set up like you did with the Phillips cameara and your DMK. Respectfully and humbly,
Joel
--------------------
Mars Watch
All images taken with:
Celestron NexStar 8i SCT
DBK 21AF04.AS
K3ccd/Registax4/PSP8
ALPO Member #4287
|
Oldfield
Postmaster
Reged: 03/20/02
Posts: 5217
Loc: Hong Kong
|
|
if you live in urban area... the answer is simple... planets are feasible but DSO is not.
--------------------
The Home Astronomer from a city where most people are proud of the light pollution
Toys: C5, Ranger, Borg 45ED II, SM40/BF10, Unistar Light, TG-SP II, LXD55, ToUCam Pro, DMK 31AF03, Canon 10x30 IS, Pentax PCF III 10x50...
My observation log and ideas My General Blog
|
imjeffp
Senior Space Cadet
Reged: 09/30/03
Posts: 4427
Loc: Cedar Park, Texas
|
|
Joel--I'd be interested in seeing the results of that comparison too. When are you going to be in Central Texas? 
--------------------
Blog
ST80 • AT80EDT/LXD650
ETX-90/DS-2000 • 10" LX200 Classic ("The Quarter-Meter Telescope at the Heritage Park Observatory")
SPC900NC • DMK21AF04 • Digital Rebel XT
|
Previous
Index
Next
Threaded
Edit
Reply
Quote
