9 replies to this topic

[Ittaku]

Seeing was appalling this morning 2/10, so I only captured Venus. I used this opportunity to use my new Thorlabs UV 400+/-20nm filter to create a UV/IR composite colour to show up cloud details. I was surprised I got anything in UV in that seeing at only 30 degrees, but we're not really looking at particularly high level detail for clouds. What's fun is that the IR image was barlowed, but the UV one was not since it's a different imaging train, and I used WinJupos' RGB combining feature which simply resizes images of different scales to deal with the scale difference.

 

IR best 1% of 5 minute capture. UV best 1% of 20 minute capture.

 

UV/IR composite

 

 

 

IR642 alone

 

Edited by Ittaku, 13 May 2025 - 05:19 PM.

[Ittaku]

If anyone's got any hints on how to place alignment boxes when stacking Venus, I'm all eyes.

[Mike Phillips]

I had to back mine off to a single ap instead of multi. It was creating lots of artifacts

Mike P in NC

[Ittaku]

I had to back mine off to a single ap instead of multi. It was creating lots of artifacts

Mike P in NC

Thanks, that's exactly what I did. It was annoying because the multi ap stack had sharper edges but there were constantly ap box artifacts no matter how I went about it.

[Mike Phillips]

Glad I'm not the only one, I wonder if there's something here that someone smarter than me knows what could be done?

 

Mike P in NC

[John Boudreau]

Autostakkert alignment point selection can be all over the map with Venus at times. The one large alignment box covering the planet's phase is usually consistent, and mid-size points can be inserted within the large one's boundaries at times, especially if there's notable cloud features when working with UV images. I recall having one fairly good UV image that just wouldn't stack without obvious artifacts from alignment point borders, so I tried stacking it in Astrosurface and it worked perfectly. But my go-to software is still Autostakkert by a wide margin --- this was just one situation where the differences between the two programs happened to work out for a particular video.

 

A few months ago while I was processing 1 micron surface videos, the large single alignment point was the way to go, but I actually had one video that while looking pretty good simply wouldn't align with one large box or any combination of smaller sizes. Then I tried one large box easily fitting the planet, followed by a very large box surrounding the first one, and it worked nicely. If that hadn't worked I probably would have tried Astrosurface again, although my past 1 micron surface stacking experiences with it had been poor. 

[Tulloch]

I dunno, I just let AS!4 auto place them and add a couple near near "tips". This seemed to work fine with my recent captures...

 

https://www.cloudyni...-12-april-2025/

https://www.cloudyni...nus-3-may-2025/

 

[Ittaku]

I dunno, I just let AS!4 auto place them and add a couple near near "tips". This seemed to work fine with my recent captures...

 

https://www.cloudyni...-12-april-2025/

https://www.cloudyni...nus-3-may-2025/

 

To be fair, the Venus I posted from a few days earlier was just auto placement, but this set of stacks just wouldn't stack without very obvious artifacts every time. The seeing was worse on this day, but who knows exactly what is responsible.

[Ittaku]

Also forgot to mention, the Uranus-M sensitivity in UV was outstanding.

[John Boudreau]

Also forgot to mention, the Uranus-M sensitivity in UV was outstanding.

I picked up a Uranus-M last month largely for wider field planetary and lunar imaging. Appears to be a great camera!

 

Player One also has a higher T% UV-Vis-IR AR-window on their smaller mono cams (I have one on my Mars-MII). PO may eventually upgrade the U-M to a larger version of this AR-window. If they do, word is that it will become available as a replacement for our early-released Uranus-M models.