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

The Heart Nebula (Two Flavors) (QHY600 First Light!)

  • Please log in to reply
15 replies to this topic

#1 ArkabPriorSol

ArkabPriorSol

    Mariner 2

  • *****
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 210
  • Joined: 23 Dec 2006
  • Loc: Austin, TX

Posted 26 October 2020 - 01:15 PM

First light image taken with my new QHY600! This camera is phenomenal. The subs are so clean, and there's zero signs of amp glow or banding. It's definitely challenging to obtain a perfectly flat field with a large sensor that has tiny pixels. I'm using a Gerd Neumann CTU, which is top quality, but it's still difficult to tweak the stars to perfection. What's more is the new camera+CTU is too heavy for my current robo-focuser, so I've got a Nightcrawler on the way. 

 

Anyway, here are two process versions, one is dramatic, vivid, and contrasty. The other is a bit softer, more natural looking in my opinion.

 

Astrobin link: https://www.astrobin.com/cycigu/0/

 

~20 hours of data. Version A I used straight SHO for the PixelMath, and Version B I used PI's PCC for color calibration.

FSQ-106N, QHY600PH, Chroma 3nm SHO, AP1200

 

Let me know in the comments which you prefer! Critiques are very welcome.

 

 

Version A:

z71SJQ-E0F7X_1824x0_Yv5VxQJr.jpg

 

Version B:

YTiuuYo-UCvb_1824x0_U4L_GF_3.jpg


  • Stelios, F.Meiresonne, dswtan and 19 others like this

#2 crgood2

crgood2

    Mariner 2

  • *****
  • Posts: 287
  • Joined: 11 Jul 2013
  • Loc: Southern Arizona

Posted 26 October 2020 - 01:19 PM

WOW.  Excellent image!  I prefer version A, personally.


  • ArkabPriorSol likes this

#3 raylinds

raylinds

    Explorer 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 96
  • Joined: 16 Sep 2020
  • Loc: Candlewood Lake, CT

Posted 26 October 2020 - 01:29 PM

Extremely impressive images! I personally prefer Version B, but A is certainly dramatic. Amazing detail, that is quite the camera.


  • ArkabPriorSol likes this

#4 lucam

lucam

    Viking 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 772
  • Joined: 09 Oct 2017
  • Loc: Upstate NY, USA

Posted 26 October 2020 - 01:32 PM

Really well done! Both versions are pleasing but I like the bolder colors better. Detail is preserved and you didn't saturate any color channel, so why not? The field of view is exceptional -  I shot a similar image with the FSQ and a ML16200 and the Heart just fits a little tight, with no breathing room.

 

You will not be disappointed with the Nitecrawler. It complements the FSQ to perfection. 


  • ArkabPriorSol and Gene3 like this

#5 sunnyday

sunnyday

    Voyager 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 11,276
  • Joined: 23 Sep 2019
  • Loc: the Canadian nebula .

Posted 26 October 2020 - 02:39 PM

wow superb take , i prefer a for the colors  and I find the details more present.thanks .


  • ArkabPriorSol likes this

#6 MikeCrapo

MikeCrapo

    Sputnik

  • *****
  • Posts: 27
  • Joined: 31 Jul 2020

Posted 26 October 2020 - 06:19 PM

I like A best as it shows more contrast an thus more detail to me.


  • ArkabPriorSol likes this

#7 Stelios

Stelios

    Voyager 1

  • *****
  • Moderators
  • Posts: 10,432
  • Joined: 04 Oct 2003
  • Loc: West Hills, CA

Posted 26 October 2020 - 06:26 PM

My initial reaction was that B was more natural (insofar as SHO can be called natural). But there's no denying that A is spectactular. 


  • ArkabPriorSol likes this

#8 Dean J.

Dean J.

    Viking 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 714
  • Joined: 13 Aug 2011
  • Loc: Vista, CA

Posted 26 October 2020 - 06:31 PM

Nice job Will!

 

I continue to wait for the mono IMX571 version to mate with my FSQ-106 + 645 reducer combo.  Those new Sony Starvis sensors sure are nice in Astro cameras.


  • ArkabPriorSol likes this

#9 ArkabPriorSol

ArkabPriorSol

    Mariner 2

  • *****
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 210
  • Joined: 23 Dec 2006
  • Loc: Austin, TX

Posted 26 October 2020 - 07:05 PM

Nice job Will!

 

I continue to wait for the mono IMX571 version to mate with my FSQ-106 + 645 reducer combo.  Those new Sony Starvis sensors sure are nice in Astro cameras.

That will be an awesome combo! You'll likely have a very nice flat field. I'm finding a full frame sensor is right at the very edge of what the FSQ-106 is capable of in terms of field flatness and chromatic aberration. APS-C seems to be the sweet spot for this scope. I'd actually love to get the QHY268PH-C and put it on an EdgeHD 11 someday and shoot more high resolution small targets!



#10 Gene3

Gene3

    Viking 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 813
  • Joined: 02 Feb 2016
  • Loc: Del Mar, CA

Posted 26 October 2020 - 08:33 PM

Hi Will,

Great images! The "no banding" statement caught my attention because my recent SHO image of NGC 6960 had significant of banding.

I used gain=26, offset =60 ( I realize gain should have been like 56 for NB). I think my USB traffic was 50. The banding would not calibrate out. I did find a PI script that took care of it.

Can you share camera setting please.

Thanks,

Gene

 

NGC 6960 Veil Nebula

Edited by Gene3, 26 October 2020 - 08:42 PM.

  • windowpane likes this

#11 wizer

wizer

    Lift Off

  • -----
  • Posts: 24
  • Joined: 23 Oct 2016
  • Loc: SoCal, USA

Posted 26 October 2020 - 11:52 PM

Version A for me. Nice images.


  • ArkabPriorSol likes this

#12 F.Meiresonne

F.Meiresonne

    Fly Me to the Moon

  • *****
  • Posts: 6,472
  • Joined: 22 Dec 2003
  • Loc: Eeklo,Belgium

Posted 27 October 2020 - 01:52 AM

Great picture, about 100x times better then mine...

 

But mine is more modest, only 3 hours of integration and a stock DSLR, but it showed up pretty well. Took a small scope too 61 mm because of the big FOV needed


  • ArkabPriorSol likes this

#13 ArkabPriorSol

ArkabPriorSol

    Mariner 2

  • *****
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 210
  • Joined: 23 Dec 2006
  • Loc: Austin, TX

Posted 27 October 2020 - 07:29 AM

Hi Will,

Great images! The "no banding" statement caught my attention because my recent SHO image of NGC 6960 had significant of banding.

I used gain=26, offset =60 ( I realize gain should have been like 56 for NB). I think my USB traffic was 50. The banding would not calibrate out. I did find a PI script that took care of it.

Can you share camera setting please.

Thanks,

Gene

 

Hey Gene, the QHY manual for the camera has a section on "5. Horizontal banding optimize"

 

Here is the text from that chapter:

 

It is a common behavior for CMOS sensor which contains some horizontal banding. Normally speaking the random horizontal banding can be removed with multiple frame stacking so it will not effect the image. The periodic horizontal banding can not be removed with stacking so it will bring some problem for the image.   For QHY600, by adjust the USB traffic in both Single Frame mode or Live Frame mode, you can adjust the frequency point of the CMOS sensor driver and it can optimize the horizontal banding appeared on the image. This optimized is very effective to remove the periodic banding in some conditions.

 

The picture above is a typical situation where part of the image is lost due to USB data transmission errors and causes image misalignment.
The reason is that due to USB communication quality problems or external interference problems, the data of the USB image data packet being transmitted is wrong and cannot pass the CRC check, so the SDK judges it as a USB transmission error. The SDK will repair communication errors to avoid crashes, but this packet of data will also be lost. Cause this phenomenon.

The check and solution are:
(1) Communication quality problems caused by USB cable damage or poor USB contact: The solution is to replace the USB cable, and check the connection of the USB cable to the computer and whether the connection between the USB cable and the camera is too loose.
(2) Some HUBs with mismatched signals may cause such problems. You can connect directly or try to replace other types of HUB. (It is recommended to use active HUB)
(3) The communication interference problem caused by the leakage of the AC adapter, it is necessary to check whether the AC adapter of each device in the system is well grounded.
(4) Use the SDK and firmware that does not match the version, download the latest installation package (QHY ​​recently released the AllInOne installation package, which can automatically replace the SDK with one click, you only need to check the corresponding software in the installation package), or request QHYCCD technology Support remote assistance.

 

My understanding is this camera is very sensitive to having a good quality USB 3.0 cable. I'm using the one included with the QHY kit. I think this one did not work well for Anis (anismo) and he had to buy a higher quality one. 

 

Here are my camera driver settings I used for this image. For future processes I'm going to use a different gain/offset, most likely 30/76. I think a gain of 26 is a little too close to the drop off for my comfort: 

q0o1Yq0.png


  • Gene3 likes this

#14 ArkabPriorSol

ArkabPriorSol

    Mariner 2

  • *****
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 210
  • Joined: 23 Dec 2006
  • Loc: Austin, TX

Posted 27 October 2020 - 07:43 AM

Here is a process summary for Version A, for anyone interested:

 

Processing:

 

PixInsight -

  • BatchPreProcessing (calibration & registration)
  • ImageIntegration to create masters for each channel (SHO)
  • Deconvolution on the Ha channel
  • PixelMath (R:SII, G:HA, B:OIII), Hubble Color Palette
  • BackgroundNeutralization on the RGB
  • HistogramTransformation
  • LRGBCombination using stretched Ha data, boosting saturation here
  • Created and applied selective RangeMask
  • Mild Curves to boost colors a bit
  • LST for some mild HDR
  • Export to 16bit tiff image

LightRoom -

  • Boosted contrast, vibrance, texture, clarity, and dehaze tweaks
  • Noise Reduction and color noise reduction
  • Selective masks to boost contrast in specific areas

Topaz Labs AI DeNoise -

  • Applied Low Light noise reduction while maintaining sharpness of details


#15 Gene3

Gene3

    Viking 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 813
  • Joined: 02 Feb 2016
  • Loc: Del Mar, CA

Posted 27 October 2020 - 09:05 AM

Hey Gene, the QHY manual for the camera has a section on "5. Horizontal banding optimize"

 

Here is the text from that chapter:

 

My understanding is this camera is very sensitive to having a good quality USB 3.0 cable. I'm using the one included with the QHY kit. I think this one did not work well for Anis (anismo) and he had to buy a higher quality one. 

 

Here are my camera driver settings I used for this image. For future processes I'm going to use a different gain/offset, most likely 30/76. I think a gain of 26 is a little too close to the drop off for my comfort: 

q0o1Yq0.png

Ah yes the manual. Thanks for the reminder. Since my banding is periodic, I will see if changes to USB traffic will help. If not I will check my USB cable. Perhaps Anismo can share information about his replacement USB cable.

Thanks,

Gene



#16 anismo

anismo

    Fly Me to the Moon

  • *****
  • Posts: 6,055
  • Joined: 30 Jan 2014
  • Loc: Austin, TX, USA

Posted 27 October 2020 - 11:09 AM

The cable that came with my camera was flaky. The camera will randomly hang and QHY tech debugged it remotely and couldnt figure out why it was happening. I swapped out to a startech USB3 cable and the problem went away.  (https://www.amazon.c...e?ie=UTF8&psc=1)

 

This cable has been consistently good IMO. It is worth a try. Also, if you a re seeing banding,  One thing to check is if you have dew heater/controller in the same power supply which could introduce electrical disturbance. 

 

Here is my current setting (just default value) and calibration is extremely clean with no hint of any banding etc. 

 

 Screen Shot 2020-10-27 at 10.28.02 AM.jpg

 




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