A Newbie's Question

Hi All,

I was wondering if any of the experienced imagers would be so kind as to share some wisdom with a newbie such as myself. Specifically, I wish to acquire one of the new webcam-type imagers for planetary use, and I am not sure which to go with. My preferences would be to acquire one that has as great a dynamic range as possible, while not sacrificing the short exposure times, and rapid downloads. I prefer monochrome, as I have an excellent filter wheel equipped with my usual hi-grade interference filters, which will allow me to shoot LRGB, or LCMY, as I have both sets. I currently own a ToUCam pro (I've ordered a 1.25" adapter, but it hasn't arrived yet), but I was considering an Atik, or the unit Wes is currently shooting with. Also, which is the best program for seeking out the best frames, and automatically registering them? I know I've asked very broad questions, but I appreciate any suggestions anyone would be so kind as to forward.

This is eerie; I can't say I really ever thought I would be starting over again, working with, or considering a new technology. It's actually very exciting, and a lot of fun.

Thank you all.

Maurizio

You're not quite a newbie , Maurizio, but I have a similar question myself, so let's see what the experts say.

Roland Christen

Thank you for your input, Eric, and you've touched on the subject I'm most concerned about; the software's accuracy when it comes to separating good frames from bad. I know when I was shooting with my CCDs, I would have hundreds, sometimes a couple thousand frames, and it was a Herculean task to go through them all to identify the best ones - especially when it was 7:00 a.m., I had just been up all night fighting off mosquitoes the size of chickens, dodging the occasional drive-by bullet, and just finished dragging my 250 lb. telescope back into my garage. If we now go to the webcam's ability to produce fifty times as many frames as the CCD for a given time frame, the ability to efficiently sort the good from the bad becomes imperative.

Again, thank you Eric.


Maurizio

Hi Maurizio,

Newbie. I like your sense of humour 8)

Actually, I guess things have really moved on considerably since your last images. Its amazing how far things have come in 3-4 years.

Firstly, i'm not sure its safe for you to put a webcam on that 10" F/8 of yours. I know how good that telescope is

You have two serious considerations in my view for a really decent webcam for filtered imaging work. Either an ATK-1HS II webcam, or a rather more expensive Lumenera LU075. I would get the Lumenera if i could justify the expense, but i cant (costs $900.)

The ATK-1HS is really quite significantly less noisey than the ToUcam Pro, especially the HS II, which has really smooth raw frames by comparsion and a much better QE. This is the camera ive used the last 18 months, and i have nothing but praise for it. UV imaging of Venus for example is really very easy with this camera, and the whole range of filters can be employed (even IR1000 and CH4 889nm with good results.)

However, the ToUcam Pro really does a superb job also, especially when the Planet is high in altitude (60 deg or more.)I obtained some superb results with the ToUcam from the Canary Islands a couple of years ago which proves it can really perform. Eric's recent Saturn images also show this.

Software. Ive tried just about everything i must admit. Registax has such a superb and user friendly interface that its hard to beat. Your concerns about frame sorting were very much shared by myself until about a 6 weeks ago. Cor and Myself worked allot to really test the quality estimators of the program, and developed a new estimator, which is currently available in the latest version. I made many custom frame sets, and tested the estimators of the program with these. The best two quality estimators were really very good (90% accurate.)

Ive also done tests on manual frame selection vs, auto quality grading, and when you have the settings right, there really is little in it. Ive tested several AVIs like this, picking the frames manually, then letting the software do it. The only difference was noise levels (hand picked much more noise due to to few frames.)

My advice would be, start with the ToUcam. I think it could really suprise you with some practice. Here's a link to a Jupiter set i got with the ToUcam a while back as an example:

http://www.damianpeach.com/images/best/march4th_2319.jpg

Its a great starting point, and you could find out how you like/get one with webcam imaging with very little outlay financially.

Best Wishes

Damian