Excellent comparison Luke. As you say there's very little difference between the two images. I'm an obsessive pixel peeper and could see small differences in the stars (especially the very faint ones) where quite a few that were visible in the 5 min subs image were virtually invisible in the 1 min image. On closer inspection the opposite is also true in some cases so I don't think you can read anything into that! Definitely worth doing the same experiment on a slower telescope just to see what the difference there is for comparison. In addition to sub length it may well highlight the upsides/downsides of faster and slower telescopes as well which could be very interesting.
@lukomatico
3 ай бұрын
Couldn't agree more Pete!! I think the next tests will be rather interesting indeed! 👍👍
@josephluciani5531
3 ай бұрын
Luke, thanks for this follow-up video. Love your experiments, especially when the results lead to further questions and inquiries. Wonderful scientific approach, keep up the great work.
@lukomatico
3 ай бұрын
Glad you enjoyed it! More to come, my friend :-) clear skies!!
@d.fresh.750
3 ай бұрын
Great experiment, and I am definitely looking forward to the continuation of this series!
@lukomatico
3 ай бұрын
Awesome, thank you for your support mate!!
@geniexmay562
3 ай бұрын
We are definitely learning with you in this series. Absolutely fascinating data. Thank You : )
@lukomatico
3 ай бұрын
My pleasure!! 👍👍
@jayhull4096
3 ай бұрын
Thanks for all your hard work. Interesting stuff. Looking forward to your future experimentation!
@lukomatico
3 ай бұрын
You and me both mate!! It's got me very interested! 👍👍
@peterraymond3653
3 ай бұрын
I wasn't expecting that! Thanks for taking the time to do these tests. I'm definitely going to use shorter subs with my RASA 8 and look forward to further tests. Your help to the astro community is second to none.
@lukomatico
3 ай бұрын
Thank you so much mate!!
@211milkman
3 ай бұрын
Fascinating video Luke! I spent 6 hours on the Trunk last night/this morning. 72x300 with the William Optics Zenith star 61 ll f/5.9 scope, the Player one Uranus C pro IMX585 camera and a Player one Anti halo duel Narrowband filter. 94% moon. Bortle 4 skies. It's cool to wake up and see you have a new video on the same target. Awesome! Going to have to try out the image analysis in pixinsight. Never knew it was there! Clear skies!!!
@lukomatico
3 ай бұрын
Excellent stuff mate, and that sounds like a lovely rig to use! I really like that camera and filter, and all paired with a nice refractor, superb! 👍👍
@Seafox0011
3 ай бұрын
This may have already been suggested ... I think BXT uses and 'dynamic' point spread function driven by the 'brightness' / definition of the features so slightly 'burn in' stars in the longer subs will have slightly different sized PSFs. Also the dimmer stars will be at the limit when differentiating from noise ... this will be notional less with more subs canceling out the noise base more. I think this goes to explain the differences between the some stars showing 'tighter' in one or the other 1 or 5 min sub stacks. Adding in how the AI models treat the PSFs based on assigned bit depth for variable exposures it leaves a few unknowns that are outside what you can test for IMO. Great tests all that said!
@lukomatico
3 ай бұрын
That makes sense! It would explain some of the differences for sure 👍👍 Thank you for sharing!
@peterlaubscher3989
3 ай бұрын
Thanks, Luke - I use the Touptec with the same IMX 571 chip and a ten inch f/4 scope with Optolong Ultimate 3nm filter and find that I can great images with 30 second subs, even less. Only with the dimmest objects do I ever need subs of 3 minutes. Many objects look good after 45 minutes of integration time.
@lukomatico
3 ай бұрын
Good stuff mate!! Glad you've got experience with these short subs to refer to, it's an interesting avenue!! 👍👍
@robb7342
3 ай бұрын
Definately not what most of us would have expected Luc, thanks for taking the time to followup with the 2nd portion of this testing. Another excelent presentation. Will be interesting to see the next comparison with less light due to the slower lens. My gut feeling suggests we are in for another surpirse.
@lukomatico
3 ай бұрын
Thank you! I'm excited for the next phase of testing 👍👍
@michaelbibby8636
3 ай бұрын
A more dramatic comparison at such short focal ratios (F2) and sensitive cmos sensors might be between, say, 15 second subs and, say, 2-3 minute subs.
@Tony-Elliott
3 ай бұрын
Hi Luke another excellent video mate and a really surprising result, looking forward to seeing your next video with a slower scope
@lukomatico
3 ай бұрын
Thanks Tony!! Hopefully coming soon 👍👍
@franciscopalenciacastro4821
3 ай бұрын
The reason of why they look almost identical is in the histograms you show in NINA while capturing. The 1 minute exposure has its histogram curve already fully shown and it is not clipped on the left. The 5 minutes exposure has the same exact histogram curve but moved further right. When the software processes the images it moves the histograms to the left as much as possible for both cases so as to remove background light pollution (without clipping the curve). Exposures above 1 minute would only have been justified if the 1 min. curve had been clipped. But since it wasn't, adding more exposure minutes was just a waste of time, as it only moved the same curve to the right without adding further usable data. That is why you see the same end result. On slower scopes, shorter exposures will be clipped to the left compared to longer ones. And then you will see differences.
@lukomatico
3 ай бұрын
I see what you're saying but with respect, I don't believe that's the whole picture - surely if what you propose was true then all you'd need to do on a slower scope would be to increase the camera offset to ensure the histogram never clips? Interesting subject! Thanks for watching and clear skies 👍
@alanjs1
3 ай бұрын
Another great video Luke. I have the same RASA (apart from it's just been returned to Celestron for replacement, the threads on the corrector plate were faulty and the ring that holds the adapter on was barely engaging on the threads in that you could jiggle the camera and pull it off!!) Your results were surprising. Opposite to conventional thought that longer is better. Just proves that you're correct in assuming that nothing is correct!!
@lukomatico
3 ай бұрын
Thanks ever so much mate!! I definitely think testing things out like this is always worthwhile, no matter the result! 👍👍 Clear skies my friend
@stuparker776
3 ай бұрын
Hey Luke, I was almost going to pass on this one, but your mention of it possibly being a bias test got me intrigued. Your experiments were really interesting! I agree with you about testing with a slow scope being the way to go. So, tonight, I'm going to give the mono version of your test a shot with my Askar 130 at F/7. I'm curious to see the difference between 1-minute, 5-minute, and 10-minute subs. I'll send over the results afterward and would love to hear your thoughts on them.
@lukomatico
3 ай бұрын
That sounds excellent Stu!! I can't wait to see the results of that 👍👍 clear skies my friend!!
@paulholdsworth2502
3 ай бұрын
Not what I would have expected either mate. I wonder if fainter targets would produce different conclusions both in broadband and narrowband ? M51 and the IC 1396 are quite bright which might help 1 min subs. Fascinating videos mate and I've been wrong both times so far 😂
@lukomatico
3 ай бұрын
Hey Paul mate!! I'm eager to test it all out for sure!! That's a very good question mate, I guess just by looking at the faintest regions of this image there's a reasonable indicator that there'd be very little overall difference in this case with the fast scope? I think on a slower scope though we're definitely going to see differences! - can't wait, thank you for all your support and clear skies my friend!!
@simonhooper2458
3 ай бұрын
Interesting. Luminance looks better on the 1m and colour depth better on the 5min but that may be youtube compression. On my f5.8 ota with 420mmm of mag with the Uranus-C from a data perspective 3min seems to be the sweet spot so far with light pollution before diminishing returns where the light pollution within the bandwidth begins to creep into the data. Which i like as it means a 3min I can collect decent data, not have too many subs to stack but also lose less subs to the wind or to aircraft as I am within a flight path.
@gabewrsewell
3 ай бұрын
wow, agreed… i knew it’d be close but not that identical! i also think a slower scope is in order too for sure, i guess the point where the difference becomes obvious is way more photon limited than i was expecting. a testament to the great efficiency of modern CMOS sensors i guess!
@lukomatico
3 ай бұрын
Totally agree Gabe, I really expected a big difference in this one - as you say, these modern sensors are changing the game it seems!! 👍👍
@mikeharden7904
3 ай бұрын
I'm looking forward to the results of a more realistic speed telescope. If I remember you have a refractor in your observatory. Thanks Luke. Seeing the results of that RASA tempts me 😊
@anthonyparrett2779
3 ай бұрын
Love the video. Would love to see an FWHM comparison, or similar resolution comparison, in addition to the noise comparison
@user-lt9py2pu6u
3 ай бұрын
Well done Luke, there's nothing wrong with rechecking your results, in fact it makes them more valid. I couldn't see any difference in those two images, though obviously I was looking at them on my phone, and my aging eyes aren't what they used to be. From your testing so far, it doesn't really seem that there is that much difference in the final images, at least not with a very fast scope.
@lukomatico
3 ай бұрын
Thank you my friend!! I'm looking forwards to testing further with a slower scope now, it's got me very interested! 👍👍
@iamjessieray
3 ай бұрын
Another great video in this series Luke! I use an f/5 newtonian (the Skywatcher 130p-ds) and have basically found something very similar in just looking at my data over time. I don't bother with extremely long subs because I end up getting less usable data due to wind or clouds or whatever else happens in the night, and due to not wanting to deal with quite so many files I usually go with 2 minute subs. Mind you I am shooting completely unfiltered, but I think that even if/when I add a dual narrowband filter to my set up I will probably run with something around 3 minute subs.
@iisunshinei1501
3 ай бұрын
Hey Luke! loving these tests! really will help out loads of people for sure! one thing though (more specifically with broadband) is the gain. Having the gain at 0 on 10m subs will give more contrast and better colours, but equal signal, if you keep the gain the same between the 2 shots, there is a huge SNR increase (ive tested it, but i did it at F10 originally) so i wonder if keeping same gain and a slower scope will change the result, either way ive found it very interesting to watch and cant wait to see the next part!
@user-it4ry8fp5o
3 ай бұрын
Nice! I would like to see this test with a slower scope since I have Askar V. I still vote for the longer subs: less data and stacking time (WBPP).
@valeryo78
3 ай бұрын
Can't be happier to continue seeing this serie!👍 It really helps undertanding! And I'm very curious to see the results with a slower scope! I use a 150 F4 with same camera, I'm very interested in seeing how this will go on! And I'm still confused about gain values you used... 😅🤣
@Zealor365
3 ай бұрын
You did a really good job on this one. My opinion: The 5 min sub(s) have less pixelation, resulting in smoother gradient tranisition.
@lukomatico
3 ай бұрын
Thank you so much my friend!! It'll be very interesting to see how the slower scope experiments turn out 👍👍
@kristjan-wn3gc
3 ай бұрын
Ofc its absolutly logical. Not even need to search some not existing differences between these two. If you take same amount of overall time exposures the results is always same. Long exposure advantage becomes to visible only comparing 1 vs1 image. If you want cleaner images always double your exposure. 1 signal = 2 noise
@lukomatico
3 ай бұрын
I really thought the read noise would have made more of a difference, we'll have to see how it works on slower scopes I guess 👍👍
@KingLoopie1
3 ай бұрын
Like, This is an interesting experiment! Please continue as much as you can afford giving up clear nights... I'm looking forward to the longer focal length scopes since that's what I own. Not having to worry about losing large chunks of time every time one of the subs get trashed by a cloud, a plane or satellite is a great benefit if this theory pans out. Computer speeds and data storage gets faster, bigger and cheaper all the time so while I'm all for shortening image processing time I also have a budget... I can walk away from a computer while it's working and go do something else. Not having to worry so much about my mount performance as much is another benefit that I see with shorter exposures so far (although I still want a good one someday!) the slower telescopes should tell the tale to me about which pieces I need to upgrade next.... 👍👍
@lukomatico
3 ай бұрын
Thank you so much for your thoughtful comment mate!! I agree for sure, these next tests are now where the real interest should start, I'm eager to get started! 👍👍
@ross1972
3 ай бұрын
It would be interesting to stack less 1 min subs and see where a difference actually occurs. Once again it makes me want to get a Rasa. Great experiment and looking forward to the next round maybe with your Askar refractor.
@intergalacticastro
3 ай бұрын
Another great video luke well done
@lukomatico
3 ай бұрын
Thanks mate!! 👍
@briankotak403
3 ай бұрын
Another great comparison Luke. Maybe try this experiment on your new Askar refractor. Dr B from Manitoba, Canada 🇨🇦
@lukomatico
3 ай бұрын
That would be cool! Thanks Dr. B! 👍👍
@robertw1871
3 ай бұрын
Appreciate the work your putting into it
@lukomatico
3 ай бұрын
My pleasure mate, it's quite a lot of fun!
@FrootyRecords
3 ай бұрын
Nice one Luke, if true the shorter subs may benefit some if their guiding is less than perfect or have a long periodic error. Suggestion.. That data would be great to test the new Graxpert update, I would like to see you test that. Cheers! Dave C.
@johntdavies
3 ай бұрын
Hi Luke, me again... Your findings are exactly as I would have predicted, not from experience but from the maths behind it. You're using an L-Extreme this time, that's a dual-band 7nm filter so 14nm bandwidth in total. Again you're in Bortle 7 which is defined as a background magnitude of 18.3. I've corrected my previous calculations to use f2.2 (previously f2) and updated the bandwidth (see numbers below). Your "ideal" exposure with the RASA in Bortle 7 and a 14nm filter is still only 22 seconds at 2% read noise and 9 seconds at 5%. You are unlikely to notice 5% so that would mean that a 30 minutes exposure would only have 5% less noise than 200X 9-second exposures. As you know the odds on a 30 minutes exposure having satellites, clouds, wind and atmospheric aberration is pretty high so generally you'd be better off with the shorter exposure. You would need to be in Bortle 5 or below for this figure to get up to a 1-minute exposure given your OTA and filter. All this said, the numbers are totally different for telescopes with a higher focal ratio, at f5.6 for example your 2% is at 142 seconds and 5% is at 56 seconds. F5.6 and a 3nm filter and you will need longer than 10 minutes to get down to 2%. I can't post screen shots on KZitem but I've got an app (which I wrote) and can show you some graphs. Here's the data for your F2.2 RASA, Bortle 7 and 14nm filter though... ---------------- Environment ---------------- Star Magnitude: 12.0 Background magnitude: 18.30 Bortle: 7.0 Seeing FWHM: 3.0 arcsec ----------------- Exposure ----------------- Sub Exposure: 1 secs Number of subs: 250 Total Integration Time: 4.2 mins ------------------ Filter ------------------ Filter Bandwidth: 14 nm Wavelength: 550 nm ---------------- Noise Calcs ---------------- Background signal: 1.75 e⁻/sec/px Electrons per sub: 1.75 e⁻/px Sub background noise: 1.32 e⁻/px Sub thermal noise: 0.00 e⁻/px Sub read noise: 1.25 e⁻/px Sub Total noise: 1.82 e⁻/px Stack Total noise: 28.78 e⁻/px One long sub total noise: 20.96 e⁻/px Extra noise: 37.31 % Ideal @ 5%: 8.7 secs Ideal @ 2%: 22.1 secs ----------- Telescope: EdgeHD 11 ----------- Type: Reflector Focal Length: 615 mm Aperture: 279 mm Focal Ratio: 2.2 Central Obstruction: 95 mm Total area: 542.2 cm² -------------- Telescope Calcs -------------- Image scale: 1.26 arcsec/px Field of View: 2.19 x 1.46 deg Airy Disk: 2.95 µm Airy Disk anglular FWHM: 0.42 arcsec Airy Disk linear FWHM: 1.24 µm Dawes limit: 0.50 arcsec Rayleigh limit: 0.50 arcsec Niquist limit: 2.52 arcsec ---------------- Pixel Data ---------------- Flux from star: 5.711e-16 W/m²/nm Star flux (telescope): 400 photons/px Star signal: 364 e⁻/px Total FWHM: 3.0 Central pixel (Seeing): 14.4 % Central pixel: 14.2 % Central pixel signal: 51.5 e⁻ Central pixel ADUs: 2,173 Central pixel Value: 0.0326 Signal noise (cp): 7.18 e⁻ Background flux: 1.92 photons/px Background signal: 1.75 e⁻/px Background noise: 1.32 e⁻ Centre pixel noise: 313 SNR: 0.165 ---------- Camera: ASI 2600MC Duo ---------- Type: Colour Resolution: 6,248 x 4,176 Size: 23.5 x 15.7 mm QE: 91 % Pixel size: 3.76 µm Bin: 1 Image Scale: 1.26 arcsec/px Gain: 300 Temperature: -10 °C Read noise: 1.25 e⁻ Full well: 1,581 Dark current: 0.00070 e/s/px eGain: 0.02372 e/ADU
@lukomatico
3 ай бұрын
Hey John!! I really appreciate the effort you give in sharing your knowledge mate, thank you! It's wonderful for me to see that the math supports the results of the experiment, it's also interesting to see the slower scope measurements you offer too - I may end up doing the next tests at around F8 to F10 depending on what I use, that should really start to show some differences I expect 👍👍 Cheers my friend, and clear skies!
@backpackmc
2 ай бұрын
Why does the focal length have an impact on light gathering /noise?
@GarnettLeary
3 ай бұрын
Very interesting results. Thanks for sharing
@lukomatico
3 ай бұрын
Thanks for watching Garnett! Clear skies my friend
@dumpydalekobservatory
3 ай бұрын
Interesting comparison mate I think 3 minutes is about as far as I've pushed the RASA using a dual narrowband filter I did start off with just 90 second subs but like you say it takes ages to stack even longer when running an i5 PC lol. Maybe a slower scope will give a more varied result next time you get out so we can hope for some more clear skies!!
@lukomatico
3 ай бұрын
Thanks Tich!! I guess with the rasa you just can't go wrong with any length sub that doesn't whiteout basically, haha!
@alimartins6669
3 ай бұрын
Another great video, Luke. Thanks. Breaking paradigms here.
@lukomatico
3 ай бұрын
Glad you enjoyed it my friend!!
@GrouchoDuke
3 ай бұрын
It takes a ton of work to put something like this together. Dude, thanks again for an awesome test! If you're bored, I'd love to see a test that more closely matches my 5" f/7.5 refractor setup.
@lukomatico
3 ай бұрын
Glad you enjoyed it my friend and thank you for the kind comment!! 👍👍
@seanod42
3 ай бұрын
Hi Luke i really enjoyed your experiments and will look forward to seeing the future ones great science keep up the good work mate i think you should do many more experiments can you use your new askar 120 scope
@astrophoto_andy3335
3 ай бұрын
I would like to see a 3 min vs. 10 min on a refractor. That's where I settled in Bortle 8 skies using NB or LP filters
@luboinchina3013
3 ай бұрын
I would love to do the same comparison with f10 Edge8HD , dual narrowband, 1min vs 10min, gain 100 vs gain 300...
@lukomatico
3 ай бұрын
I'll see what I can do!!
@hguawcire
3 ай бұрын
Very nice video. Can't wait to see the results of a slower telescope. Helps me out since I have a Celestron 9.25 with Hyper Star but also have an Askar 80 PHQ. Keep up the amazing work. 😁
@lukomatico
3 ай бұрын
I'm really intrigued to see how much the difference will be! 👍👍
@michaellewis5921
4 күн бұрын
This is very timely for me, as I image with a mono 571 based camera normally, but I have recently put together a more portable OSC setup that I wish to try out, using Altair dual band filters on NB targets, and was wondering about this very tradeoff. I also watched part 1. A these results are a bit enigmatic and non-intuitive, and as you say, perhaps skewed a bit by your very fast system. I will also look forward to the 3rd installment in this series. I don't suppose you have something like a Redcat 51 you could test this on? Slower and with a very much smaller aperture than the big 11" RASA - might make a difference...
@Astro_Shed
3 ай бұрын
Great video Luke, but TBH these are the results I would have expected, there should really be no difference with any scope between and equal total time of 1min subs or 5 min subs…so for me I think this video proves this.. 👍🏻
@lukomatico
3 ай бұрын
I can't wait to test it out mate, it's an interesting question now we have these ultra low read noise cameras!! 👍👍
@AlexN-Astro
3 ай бұрын
Wow! You got a ticket to heilung!! I'm going in November! Great video as usual!
@lukomatico
3 ай бұрын
Aw mate you're going to love it, it was basically the most memorable night of my life, no joke 👍👍
@AlexN-Astro
3 ай бұрын
@@lukomatico awesome mate! Yeah I'm really looking forward to it!! I saw them a couple of years ago too!
@lukomatico
3 ай бұрын
@@AlexN-Astro That's superb!! I'd go see them again in a heartbeat if I get the chance! :-D I've now got tickets for Wardruna next, can't wait! 👍👍
@AlexN-Astro
3 ай бұрын
@@lukomatico I'm tossing up going wardrunda too. They are out here in Australia a few months later I think
@lukomatico
3 ай бұрын
It'll be my first time going to see them live so I can't say for sure, but my gut feeling is you wouldn't regret doing it! You almost always regret the things you don't do, rarely the things you do I guess! :-D Cheers!
@southbronxny5727
3 ай бұрын
To me, the shorter image has better contrast.
@tomhoskins4913
3 ай бұрын
Great work, I am curious to see how the results will track with slower scopes, say F/4 to F/7
@CDigata
3 ай бұрын
Everyone's a winner baby, cant you see 👀, like you say the longer you expose the less data to manage.. a worthy test it was with interesting result..
@lukomatico
3 ай бұрын
Thanks so much Chris mate!! Can't wait to test further now 👍👍
@msacco
3 ай бұрын
Would love to see this with a slower scope as you mentioned. Lose these videos :)
@lukomatico
3 ай бұрын
Absolutely will do this!! 👍👍
@rogergeorge2403
3 күн бұрын
Don't know if technically possible but do you think a camera could record a long exposure at multiple increments in time? For example a five minute exposure could give you 5 different image files. 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5 minutes. So if you have a nasty plane come in your shot at minute #5 you could use a 4 minute exposure instead.
@AmatureAstronomer
3 ай бұрын
Nice.
@lukomatico
3 ай бұрын
Thank you!
@luboinchina3013
3 ай бұрын
Rasa 1s vs Rasa 1min
@ThisOne_Astro
3 ай бұрын
Yay a Luke video
@lukomatico
3 ай бұрын
Haha!! Thank you again mate, hope you've been doing well!! 👍👍 (And getting enough sleep!)
@bronco_fv
3 ай бұрын
Well, because you’re at f/2 even the 1 minute subs gather a lot of photons. I feel the experiment would have been better served by 12s vs 60s subs.
@actudoran
3 ай бұрын
nice ... not really surprising on your monster 😂 try a frac ... or newt ... f5 ish ... 😊 well done and looking forward to your next experiment!
@lukomatico
3 ай бұрын
Thanks, will do my friend!! 👍👍
@actudoran
3 ай бұрын
@@lukomatico i on the other hand am doing lucky imaging in sharpcap with the FWHM filter on using 0.2 to 4 second subs that livestock into 5 minutes images with mega sharp stars ... I stack the 5 minutes images thereafter for nebulosities ... at least that's the plan :))) ... something always goes t..s up ...
@lukomatico
3 ай бұрын
Ah no way! I do that too sometimes!! It's a great way to cut down on those huge overheads of doing everything conventionally too 👍👍
@MrLuke1970
3 ай бұрын
Hey Luke, interesting video. I often use dual narrowband 😊. I'll add that shorter sub stack can be even slightly better due to diethering or not? 😊
@lukomatico
3 ай бұрын
Thanks mate!! I think plenty of dithers is always an advantage 👍
@gianlucabelgrado3624
3 ай бұрын
could you make a comparison with short sub (less than 2 minutes) and extremely long sub (more than 20 minutes)?
@chamallowgrille2493
3 ай бұрын
Next time: try lucky imaging, like very VERY short exposures compare to 1 or 2 min classics exposures 👍
@mikehardy8247
3 ай бұрын
What bortle are you in? Cuiv did a video concerning the quality of an image and number of exposures on a log curve. He shot 1024, 30 second shots. 64 being a reasonable compromise. 2,4,16,64,256,1024... I wonder how following the logic of diminishing returns correlates to sub exposure length. Hope I'm clear.
@lukomatico
3 ай бұрын
Bortle 7 skies here my friend! 👍👍 Great question you pose there, I'd expect you'd reach the point of diminishing returns more quickly (in a temporal sense) with shorter subs as the read noise contribution should make their stacking efficiency marginally lower, than that of longer subs - that said, I've seen some very nice results comprising of many tens of thousands of 1s subs, so it still works however diminished!
@mikehardy8247
3 ай бұрын
I remember Niko Carver doing many 1 s , subs. "Walking noise " was an issue. Clear skies being rare, I give you credit for using valuable imaging time to do this.
@MarkoZen81
3 ай бұрын
I am using a RedCat51 and an asi533MC Pro (OSC). I have noticed I get the same results when I do 30s subs with no guiding (I use ascom direct guider in NINA which does the dithering for me) and with 120s subs guiding. In fact I get more data as I hardly have to throw out subs when I am not guiding and doing 30s subs then I get on the 120s subs where there are always some to throw out when a spike in guiding occurs. The only disadvantage with the 30s subs is the amount of files I get in a night. More disk space is required and the stacking takes a looooong time with PixInsight WBPP. If I am honest I really don’t mind the stacking time, I usually run it and forget it for about 1-2 hours. The disk space is also cheap these days. I would really like to see an experiment when you do 30s subs unguided. (but still using dithering -for example ascom direct guider in NINA). I think you’ll be surprised,
@lukomatico
3 ай бұрын
Thank you so much for the feedback and sharing your thoughts!! It could be cool to really expand these experiments 👍👍
@desbarry8414
3 ай бұрын
Dr Robin Glover, the designer of Sharpcap was correct all along. The longer your subs, the more your mount works against you. I did this target in January, with my C925 hyperstar kit with an IDAS uhs f2 filter and measured the sky with Sharpcap, 100 second exposure. Bingo!
@zaphus
3 ай бұрын
Did you adjust gain on the shorter subs so that it gave a better histogram (away from the left hand edge) - or were both sets of subs using the same gain?
Пікірлер: 111