Jump to content

  •  

CNers have asked about a donation box for Cloudy Nights over the years, so here you go. Donation is not required by any means, so please enjoy your stay.

Photo

ASI1600MMC Beta test

This topic has been archived. This means that you cannot reply to this topic.
1767 replies to this topic

#1701 bigeastro

bigeastro

    Vanguard

  • *****
  • Posts: 2,100
  • Joined: 20 Feb 2015

Posted 11 June 2016 - 12:51 PM

Jon,

That is what I was trying to say about the design also.  I think that ZWO would somehow regulate the camera via firmware for cool down velocity as a failsafe.  I would think that they would test for failure of startup cooling velocity or impacts to the chip and plan accordingly.  These are all assumptions, but probably correct, at least for near term impacts to the chip.  This does not mean to say that if you can cool it down slower you should not do that.  Whether it helps the chip or not, a couple to five minutes of warming up the chip with electronic foreplay is probably a good idea.


 

#1702 CCDer

CCDer

    Viking 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 505
  • Joined: 06 Nov 2015

Posted 11 June 2016 - 12:52 PM

Yes, I never saw the throttling go over 15% on cool down to 0. So I'll just do a staged warm up before power down.

 

 

Thanks

Mark


 

#1703 KGoodwin

KGoodwin

    Viking 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 546
  • Joined: 22 Apr 2013

Posted 11 June 2016 - 12:55 PM

So Sam at ZWO replied and told me to try and run it with Mac OSX programs.
Those crashed as well.
So the following programs have failed on the ASI1600 for me.
Mac: Nebulosity 4, oaCapture.
Mac/Windows via bootcmap, SharpCapture, Astrolive, APT, Nebulosity 4
Windows on a windows machine APT.

 

I think the problem might not be the software.


 

#1704 bigeastro

bigeastro

    Vanguard

  • *****
  • Posts: 2,100
  • Joined: 20 Feb 2015

Posted 11 June 2016 - 12:57 PM

 

So Sam at ZWO replied and told me to try and run it with Mac OSX programs.
Those crashed as well.
So the following programs have failed on the ASI1600 for me.
Mac: Nebulosity 4, oaCapture.
Mac/Windows via bootcmap, SharpCapture, Astrolive, APT, Nebulosity 4
Windows on a windows machine APT.

 

I think the problem might not be the software.

 

Hey Keith,

Where are our images?   Holding out eh?  Okay we know, you got to process them and so on and so forth but at least I want to see what you fished out of the sky last night.


 

#1705 KGoodwin

KGoodwin

    Viking 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 546
  • Joined: 22 Apr 2013

Posted 11 June 2016 - 01:02 PM

 

 

So Sam at ZWO replied and told me to try and run it with Mac OSX programs.
Those crashed as well.
So the following programs have failed on the ASI1600 for me.
Mac: Nebulosity 4, oaCapture.
Mac/Windows via bootcmap, SharpCapture, Astrolive, APT, Nebulosity 4
Windows on a windows machine APT.

 

I think the problem might not be the software.

 

Hey Keith,

Where are our images?   Holding out eh?  Okay we know, you got to process them and so on and so forth but at least I want to see what you fished out of the sky last night.

 

 

Not sure if you meant me, I'm Kyle rather than Keith, but I'm integrating them right now.  This morning was all kid stuff, so my youngest is now napping and I'm now processing.


 

#1706 bigeastro

bigeastro

    Vanguard

  • *****
  • Posts: 2,100
  • Joined: 20 Feb 2015

Posted 11 June 2016 - 01:05 PM

I am sorry Kyle,

 

No disrespect intended.  Yes, I know you were at it last night, and got a whole bunch of data on the Crescent.  It will be good to look at when you are finished.

 

Thanks


 

#1707 KGoodwin

KGoodwin

    Viking 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 546
  • Joined: 22 Apr 2013

Posted 11 June 2016 - 01:14 PM

I am sorry Kyle,

 

No disrespect intended.  Yes, I know you were at it last night, and got a whole bunch of data on the Crescent.  It will be good to look at when you are finished.

 

Thanks

 

No worries! :)


 

#1708 Jon Rista

Jon Rista

    ISS

  • *****
  • Posts: 24,984
  • Joined: 10 Jan 2014

Posted 11 June 2016 - 01:18 PM

ASI1600 Bias Stacking Effectiveness

I did some testing with Low Gain (Gain 0) data. I acquired 256 bias frames at -20C with SGP using the latest ASCOM driver. Stacked them in PI, with stack sizes spanning the range from 4x through 256x frames. I performed statistical

analysis on the whole lot to determine how many bias frames need to be stacked for the most effective and efficient results.

 

e5wrJLr.jpg

Based on this analysis, and the visual observation of noise reduction below, I do not believe there is a need to stack more than 64 bias frames in most cases, maybe 81.

 

IsN9fKA.gif

 

Full Sequence GIF: http://i.imgur.com/QUIDrOm.gif

 

Based on the convergence of the histogram in the animation above (click the link below the short GIF here to see the full series progression GIF), it does indeed appear that to get the full 16-bits of precision out of ASI1600 data, you do need to stack 256 subs. However, by 81 subs you have gained another full three bits of precision, which I think will probably be enough for most people. I think some highlight precision testing is still needed, as when I processed some of the M57 data previously, there did appear to be some posterization in the highlights, and that was even at 76 frames. If posterization in the highlights is an issue, then I believe stacking a full 256 sub (or larger) stack might indeed be warranted. 


Edited by Jon Rista, 11 June 2016 - 01:21 PM.

 

#1709 glend

glend

    Surveyor 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 1,998
  • Joined: 04 Feb 2014

Posted 11 June 2016 - 01:52 PM

It's hard to collimate an RC. I would bet it's collimation.

Amen, i have one of them, which mostly gathers dust for that reason.


Edited by glend, 11 June 2016 - 01:55 PM.

 

#1710 KGoodwin

KGoodwin

    Viking 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 546
  • Joined: 22 Apr 2013

Posted 11 June 2016 - 02:08 PM

Apparently my rotational framing of the Crescent was off by a bit more than I thought last night compared to Tuesday night due to switching to the PreciseParts adapter and not getting it rotated back to the same position.  As a result the framing is pretty significantly compromised and I'll no longer have the nice context around the Crescent that I wanted after I crop everything.  The main purpose of this Crescent image was as a test of the new camera and to provide detail of the Crescent in a future widefield project of the greater nebula complex in the area, so it's fine for that purpose.  I'm going to do some processing and then I'll post the three channel image in a while.


 

#1711 Jon Rista

Jon Rista

    ISS

  • *****
  • Posts: 24,984
  • Joined: 10 Jan 2014

Posted 11 June 2016 - 02:14 PM

 

It's hard to collimate an RC. I would bet it's collimation.

Amen, i have one of them, which mostly gathers dust for that reason.

 

 

I'll second that Amen. I love the resolution the RC offers, but mine won't hold collimation well. So I am constantly fiddling with it to get good results, which is really...never. I have never really quite liked my stars from the RC, always some aberration visible in the subs. I know people with SCTs complain about mirror flop...but after a year and three months with the RC, I think I'd happily take on mirror flop for the ease of collimating spherical mirrors. 


 

#1712 Ken Sturrock

Ken Sturrock

    Cardinal Ximenez

  • *****
  • Administrators
  • Posts: 10,662
  • Joined: 26 Sep 2009

Posted 11 June 2016 - 02:16 PM

Last night, when I activated cooling with TheSkyX I saw the temp drop very quickly so I stopped it at 0. I didn't see anything in TheSkyX to control the cool down time so I'm thinking the best approach would be to start with a different app like SharpCap to cool it down and then switch to TheSkyX. Does this sound like the best solution?


This topic was discussed last week in this very thread and, other than starting an argument between two members who actually agreed with each other, nobody seemed really worried about it back then.

In the ideal world you'd lower and raise the temperature slowly but, aside from a few cases, most people probably are not compulsive about slowly changing the temperature of their cameras and the world is not littered with cracked cameras. Granted, older cameras (such as my and BigE's old SBIGs) probably are not capable of changing temperature that rapidly but, even among newer cameras, you just don't hear about many thermal shock problems or "overheating in an attempt to cool". This doesn't mean that it shouldn't be considered, but pragmatically, it doesn't seem to be a problem. Moisture can be an issue, but in the case of the 1600, we've heard plenty about that particular sub-system.

 

If you're using The SkyX, you can simply change the camera's temperature under "Temp Setup" and slowly nudge the temperature down (and up). Leave the temperature at a cool, but above zero, temperature when you're done. I do this with my old SBIG to avoid frost when I forget to bake the desiccant plug. If you are compulsive enough to worry about it but not so worried that you actually want to do any work by changing the temperature yourself, you can use a variation of the script that Chris wrote in this Bisque forum thread to slowly change the temperature by using delays.


 

#1713 Jon Rista

Jon Rista

    ISS

  • *****
  • Posts: 24,984
  • Joined: 10 Jan 2014

Posted 11 June 2016 - 02:27 PM

So, I may have encountered a curious problem. Has anyone noticed any unexpected reversions of the ASCOM driver settings to unity gain? I acquired quite a but of test data last night at lower gain settings, namely gain 0. However when I brought the data into PI to test, it seemed to be giving me read noise results better even than my original unity gain tests, and FWC results much worse than zero gain (8-9ke- FWCs). I checked the driver settings, and they were again at unity gain, although the last time I set them last night, I chose the high dynamic range preset, applied and closed the driver, then reconnected SGP. 


 

#1714 tolgagumus

tolgagumus

    Vendor

  • *****
  • Vendors
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 3,691
  • Joined: 21 Jul 2014

Posted 11 June 2016 - 02:40 PM

So, I may have encountered a curious problem. Has anyone noticed any unexpected reversions of the ASCOM driver settings to unity gain? I acquired quite a but of test data last night at lower gain settings, namely gain 0. However when I brought the data into PI to test, it seemed to be giving me read noise results better even than my original unity gain tests, and FWC results much worse than zero gain (8-9ke- FWCs). I checked the driver settings, and they were again at unity gain, although the last time I set them last night, I chose the high dynamic range preset, applied and closed the driver, then reconnected SGP.


Yes and I talked to Yang about this issue. He told me in the next release of the drivers, it will remember the last used setting. I always use the unity setting. I noticed this issue with the bandwidth speed. They know about it. I change the settings everytime before I connect the camera.
 

#1715 KGoodwin

KGoodwin

    Viking 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 546
  • Joined: 22 Apr 2013

Posted 11 June 2016 - 02:49 PM

 

 

It's hard to collimate an RC. I would bet it's collimation.

Amen, i have one of them, which mostly gathers dust for that reason.

 

 

I'll second that Amen. I love the resolution the RC offers, but mine won't hold collimation well. So I am constantly fiddling with it to get good results, which is really...never. I have never really quite liked my stars from the RC, always some aberration visible in the subs. I know people with SCTs complain about mirror flop...but after a year and three months with the RC, I think I'd happily take on mirror flop for the ease of collimating spherical mirrors. 

 

 

I'll third that Amen.  I sold one for that reason.  It's a pain to collimate, but like anything, with practice it's not hard to get good at it.  The frustrating thing is that it doesn't hold collimation, even across the sky, because of the way the AT RC mirror cell/focuser attachment is designed.  Apparently the newer truss versions have fixed this issue, but mine is long gone.  I like wider field and shorter focal length better, anyhow.  I'm a refractor guy at heart.


 

#1716 FirstC8

FirstC8

    Apollo

  • -----
  • Posts: 1,118
  • Joined: 10 Mar 2016

Posted 11 June 2016 - 03:58 PM




It's hard to collimate an RC. I would bet it's collimation.

Amen, i have one of them, which mostly gathers dust for that reason.

I'll second that Amen. I love the resolution the RC offers, but mine won't hold collimation well. So I am constantly fiddling with it to get good results, which is really...never. I have never really quite liked my stars from the RC, always some aberration visible in the subs. I know people with SCTs complain about mirror flop...but after a year and three months with the RC, I think I'd happily take on mirror flop for the ease of collimating spherical mirrors.

I'll third that Amen. I sold one for that reason. It's a pain to collimate, but like anything, with practice it's not hard to get good at it. The frustrating thing is that it doesn't hold collimation, even across the sky, because of the way the AT RC mirror cell/focuser attachment is designed. Apparently the newer truss versions have fixed this issue, but mine is long gone. I like wider field and shorter focal length better, anyhow. I'm a refractor guy at heart.

Have the newer open truss versions really fixed this and now they hold collimation? They were on my list but reading all the horror stories about collimation I don't know anymore.

I had to collimate my SCT, it was pain, had to buy an artificial star generator then somehow find enough room indoor to use the thing. At least it was a one time deal.
 

#1717 FiremanDan

FiremanDan

    Aurora

  • *****
  • Posts: 4,869
  • Joined: 11 Apr 2014

Posted 11 June 2016 - 04:02 PM

 

So Sam at ZWO replied and told me to try and run it with Mac OSX programs.
Those crashed as well.
So the following programs have failed on the ASI1600 for me.
Mac: Nebulosity 4, oaCapture.
Mac/Windows via bootcmap, SharpCapture, Astrolive, APT, Nebulosity 4
Windows on a windows machine APT.

 

I think the problem might not be the software.

 

 

What is the problem then? Is the camera bad? 


 

#1718 syscore

syscore

    Aurora

  • *****
  • Posts: 4,711
  • Joined: 07 Sep 2015

Posted 11 June 2016 - 04:19 PM

"What is the problem then? Is the camera bad?"

 

Could be.

 

But I think it is the computer.


 

#1719 FiremanDan

FiremanDan

    Aurora

  • *****
  • Posts: 4,869
  • Joined: 11 Apr 2014

Posted 11 June 2016 - 04:31 PM

Two computers, including a windows lap top. 


 

#1720 FiremanDan

FiremanDan

    Aurora

  • *****
  • Posts: 4,869
  • Joined: 11 Apr 2014

Posted 11 June 2016 - 04:33 PM

I have tried a total of 8 different programs between two computers and 3 operating systems.  The ZWO forum has one or two people reporting similar issues. I heard reports from night skies network that their cameras are buggy too.


 

#1721 FiremanDan

FiremanDan

    Aurora

  • *****
  • Posts: 4,869
  • Joined: 11 Apr 2014

Posted 11 June 2016 - 04:38 PM

What do you mean? 
I have only been setting up at home. 


 

#1722 syscore

syscore

    Aurora

  • *****
  • Posts: 4,711
  • Joined: 07 Sep 2015

Posted 11 June 2016 - 04:40 PM

I have tried a total of 8 different programs between two computers and 3 operating systems.  The ZWO forum has one or two people reporting similar issues. I heard reports from night skies network that their cameras are buggy too.

 

Then exchange the camera.

 

You see everyone here getting it working, right?


Edited by syscore, 11 June 2016 - 04:40 PM.

 

#1723 bigeastro

bigeastro

    Vanguard

  • *****
  • Posts: 2,100
  • Joined: 20 Feb 2015

Posted 11 June 2016 - 04:42 PM

Owwwwwhhhhh.  A one, two collimation instigation punch to my poor TPO RC10.  You guys are brutal. 

 

A plague of bad weather on your houses. :storm:  

 

I don't care, I will switch to the Newtonian.  It needs some loving.  Gives me a reason to get that up and running.  I won't give up on my RC tough, neither one of us are perfect.  I bet I get it close to spot on for at least five minutes.  My guess is a little tilt and a little collimation. 

 

Watch out.  Tonight looks like the weather has cleared, Looking like it is clear, 5/5 seeing, but below average transparency, and a partially menacing moon.


Edited by bigeastro, 11 June 2016 - 04:43 PM.

 

#1724 FiremanDan

FiremanDan

    Aurora

  • *****
  • Posts: 4,869
  • Joined: 11 Apr 2014

Posted 11 June 2016 - 04:44 PM

I do see everyone here getting it working. Thank you for pointing that out. 
As if this isn't frustrating enough. I appreciate your expert advice.


 

#1725 Jon Rista

Jon Rista

    ISS

  • *****
  • Posts: 24,984
  • Joined: 10 Jan 2014

Posted 11 June 2016 - 04:45 PM

I managed to acquire some proper low gain data, and did some noise analyses in PI. Read noise conforms to ZWO's specs, however the dark current measurements have me curious. I am getting 0.106e-/s when I measure in 12-bit, which is way off of ZWO's chart...however I get 0.007e-/s when I measure in 16-bit:

 

Noise Analysis 12-bit.jpg

 

Noise Analysis 16-bit.jpg

 

If I convert the two dark levels to e- via the gain of 4.81, then subtract the dark 2 level from dark 1 and divide by the exposure difference of 480 seconds, I get 0.0007887e-/s, which is much more in line with the 16-bit measure. I am then honestly not sure how PI is calculating dark current when I choose 12 bit as the bit depth...


Edited by Jon Rista, 11 June 2016 - 04:47 PM.

 


CNers have asked about a donation box for Cloudy Nights over the years, so here you go. Donation is not required by any means, so please enjoy your stay.


Recent Topics






Cloudy Nights LLC
Cloudy Nights Sponsor: Astronomics