Saturn.....

Photos, sketches and other images by SPA members

Moderators: joe, Brian, Guy Fennimore

gary1968
Posts: 682
Joined: Tue Nov 21, 2006 10:09 pm
Location: west lothian, 55.9N / 3.5W
Contact:

Saturn.....

Post by gary1968 »

Howdy,

After a change in direction away from DSO imaging here is my recent endevour with Saturn.......
The first is from 28/04/12, the second is from 04/05/12 & the third is a composite showing Saturn and 4 moons from 04/05/12.
I am finding focusing this set up quite difficult, and getting the camera settings 'right' is a real PITA.....
Processing was hard going, until I someone pointed me to AS!2. This seems to do a better job than Registax.... But I have a lot to learn and a long way to go.
As usual C&C welcome folks.

Gaz

Image
Saturn-280412 by gary anderson1968, on Flickr

Image
saturn 040512 by gary anderson1968, on Flickr

Image
saturn and moons by gary anderson1968, on Flickr
56N / 3.5W
HEQ5 Pro. Skywatcher ED80, William Optics Field Flattener III, Canon 1000d - Imaging Rig. Guided with Orion 8x50 & QHY5.
Control Via Ascom, EQMod, Cartes du Ciel and PHD.
Everything will be OK in the end, if its not OK, its not the end..............
David Frydman
Posts: 5363
Joined: Mon Jan 18, 2010 9:25 am
Contact:

Post by David Frydman »

Dear Gary,
Thanks for showing the interesting photos.
I cannot make out the one with the four moons.
The two brighter ones on the top are confusing me.
One seems to be Titan, but what is the other?
If you had a time for the image you could look it up.

Here I had my first glimpse of Venus an hour or more ago after days of solid cloud.
Regards, David

At a guess the two fainter ones might be Rhea and Dione??

Maybe two Titans on two adjoining days?
gary1968
Posts: 682
Joined: Tue Nov 21, 2006 10:09 pm
Location: west lothian, 55.9N / 3.5W
Contact:

Post by gary1968 »

Hi David, thanks for the kind words. That image with the moons was shot 'around' 11pm 04/05/12...... I will run stellarium backwards to try to find out what they are.

Gary
56N / 3.5W
HEQ5 Pro. Skywatcher ED80, William Optics Field Flattener III, Canon 1000d - Imaging Rig. Guided with Orion 8x50 & QHY5.
Control Via Ascom, EQMod, Cartes du Ciel and PHD.
Everything will be OK in the end, if its not OK, its not the end..............
gary1968
Posts: 682
Joined: Tue Nov 21, 2006 10:09 pm
Location: west lothian, 55.9N / 3.5W
Contact:

Post by gary1968 »

Hi David,

Thanks for the kind words. I have checked on Stellarium and this is what I have found, Dion is to the right, Rhea to the left, and you are right, Titan above along with HIP 66280 (not a moon, lol)
Sorry for any confusion, I just assumed they were all moons, and never confirmed before posting. However, that image I posted on another couple of forums and you are the first to point out the error, so well spotted!!

Gary
56N / 3.5W
HEQ5 Pro. Skywatcher ED80, William Optics Field Flattener III, Canon 1000d - Imaging Rig. Guided with Orion 8x50 & QHY5.
Control Via Ascom, EQMod, Cartes du Ciel and PHD.
Everything will be OK in the end, if its not OK, its not the end..............
David Frydman
Posts: 5363
Joined: Mon Jan 18, 2010 9:25 am
Contact:

Post by David Frydman »

Thanks Gary,
I actually got Rhea and Dione correct in the positions I thought.
I also thought it was Titan and a star of similar brightness although maybe not visually the same. Or that you had combined two images of Titan on two adjoining dates.
As I have not seen Rhea and Dione for a few years quite pleased I can still identify Saturn's moons.

Today for first time in ages a clearish transparent sky with nice sunshine. Perhaps winter is over at least for a few days.

Regards, David
smerral
Posts: 1363
Joined: Sun Oct 25, 2009 3:56 pm
Location: Caithness
Contact:

Re: Saturn.....

Post by smerral »

Hi Gary - planetary imaging is a whole lot different from deep sky. I like to have a go at both (jack of all trades etc. :D ) These are a good start but it looks as if your gain is a bit high, hence the diagonal lines. It's difficult to get right as you don't want gain too low either - round about 40-50% I'd say. It really is just a matter of experimenting and getting the feel for it. Your focus looks OK though. :)
PS. another free program worth trying is autostakkert - http://www.astrokraai.nl/wp/download/
It doesn't have wavelets but you can always use the ones in Registax. :wink:
BRIAN
Celestron Nexstar 8SE, Ioptron CEM 25P mount
Altair Astro 102 ED refractor with Lunt B600 CaK diagonal
Coronado PST DS, Daystar Quark
ZWO ASI120MM camera, Canon 1000D (astro modified), Starlight Express SXV H9-C.
Gallery: http://www.astrobin.com/users/smerral/
gary1968
Posts: 682
Joined: Tue Nov 21, 2006 10:09 pm
Location: west lothian, 55.9N / 3.5W
Contact:

Re: Saturn.....

Post by gary1968 »

Hi Brian,

Thanks for the kind words.
I used Autostakkert for those images, I originally stacked them in R6 but the results were much worse than those up there....
I have also found out that I had the FPS too high at 20 or 25 FPS, the avi's were compressed because of that. Next time I will run the camera at 10 or 5 FPS.
Unfortunately astoronomy for me is about finished for the season as it is getting dark too late, so further attampts will probably have to wait until Autumn.
I am thinking about some Solar imaging this summer but will have to research what filters etc I will need for that.
Anyway, thanks again mate.

Gary
56N / 3.5W
HEQ5 Pro. Skywatcher ED80, William Optics Field Flattener III, Canon 1000d - Imaging Rig. Guided with Orion 8x50 & QHY5.
Control Via Ascom, EQMod, Cartes du Ciel and PHD.
Everything will be OK in the end, if its not OK, its not the end..............
David Webb
Posts: 73
Joined: Tue Mar 13, 2012 9:38 am
Location: Suffolk
Contact:

Re: Saturn.....

Post by David Webb »

Yes well done on those photos of Saturn, I put my CCD Camera in my scope tonight to film Saturn, it was clear and very bright in my lens to view, but the camera could not see Saturn at all on my Laptop screen, it was just as if the lens cap was on it, has anyone any idea as to why my Celestron CCD can only view the moon?
David
Member of SPA.
smerral
Posts: 1363
Joined: Sun Oct 25, 2009 3:56 pm
Location: Caithness
Contact:

Re: Saturn.....

Post by smerral »

Ah Gary I see - I thought you'd used Avistack (which I also use on occasions). Yes the frame rate needs to be 10fps (5fps is worth a try if the seeing is REALLY good). As I live in the north of Scotland my dark nights have vanished too. I'm pretty much into solar imaging so if I can help don't hesitate to ask.

David, because the CCD is small it is difficult to centre the planet on the chip; my guess is that you either didn't have Saturn on the screen, or the focus was out (and it doesn't need much and you won't see anything). When I started I practiced in the daytime so I knew just where to focus for the camera. Then I would centre the planet in a high power eyepiece, carefully refocus and then carefully replace the eyepiece with the camera. Now I use a flip mirror, which makes things a good deal easier!
http://www.modernastronomy.com/accessor ... lipMirrors
BRIAN
Celestron Nexstar 8SE, Ioptron CEM 25P mount
Altair Astro 102 ED refractor with Lunt B600 CaK diagonal
Coronado PST DS, Daystar Quark
ZWO ASI120MM camera, Canon 1000D (astro modified), Starlight Express SXV H9-C.
Gallery: http://www.astrobin.com/users/smerral/
gary1968
Posts: 682
Joined: Tue Nov 21, 2006 10:09 pm
Location: west lothian, 55.9N / 3.5W
Contact:

Re: Saturn.....

Post by gary1968 »

Thanks for the offer of advive in my Solar imaging attempts Brian..... :D
So, firstly what filters would I need? I have a 12" flextube and my SPC900 webcam. Do I have to filter the entire aperture of the scope or can I filter just the little opening in the plastic cover? Can I leave the scope open and only filter the camera?? Sorry if these are obvious questions but Solar imaging is something I have never tried or looked into before.

Thanks,
Gary
56N / 3.5W
HEQ5 Pro. Skywatcher ED80, William Optics Field Flattener III, Canon 1000d - Imaging Rig. Guided with Orion 8x50 & QHY5.
Control Via Ascom, EQMod, Cartes du Ciel and PHD.
Everything will be OK in the end, if its not OK, its not the end..............
smerral
Posts: 1363
Joined: Sun Oct 25, 2009 3:56 pm
Location: Caithness
Contact:

Re: Saturn.....

Post by smerral »

So, firstly what filters would I need?
The cheapest way is to make your own. :D
http://www.green-witch.com/acatalog/Solar_Filte.html

There are dedicated filters you can buy (I use one):
http://www.altairastro.com/product.php?productid=16319
Can I leave the scope open and only filter the camera??
NO DEFINITELY NOT - YOU NEED TO STOP THE LIGHT/HEAT AT THE TELESCOPE OBJECTIVE.
Do I have to filter the entire aperture of the scope or can I filter just the little opening in the plastic cover?
Yes you can do this for starters. It will cut down the resolution but it will give you a chance to get started on imaging without having to have a 12" filter. How large is the opening? I get some excellent solar shots from my 80mm refractor. :D

Hope that helps!

Brian
BRIAN
Celestron Nexstar 8SE, Ioptron CEM 25P mount
Altair Astro 102 ED refractor with Lunt B600 CaK diagonal
Coronado PST DS, Daystar Quark
ZWO ASI120MM camera, Canon 1000D (astro modified), Starlight Express SXV H9-C.
Gallery: http://www.astrobin.com/users/smerral/
David Frydman
Posts: 5363
Joined: Mon Jan 18, 2010 9:25 am
Contact:

Re: Saturn.....

Post by David Frydman »

Dear Gary and Brian,
With a 12 inch Newtonian, assuming the secondary is about 3 to 3.5 inch central obstruction one could get an off axis clear aperture hole of 4.25 to 4.5 inches.
It may be the supplied cover hole is less say 3.5 inches?
Either way, a 90 to 110mm aperture could give very good resolution of the Sun's features.
It would also be about f/15 if the Newtonian is around f/5 and would be theoretically free of false colour.

One thing that bothers me is that looking on the Baader filter site given above it describes the material as ND 3.0 and ND 5.0.
There is the possibility of serious confusion here as a photographic filter of ND 3 transmits I think about 0.1 of full sunshine. I will check.
The Astro ND 5.0 is meant to transmit I think 0.00001 of full sunlight whereas a photographic ND 5 transmits again around 0.1 of full sunlight. Again I will check.

The use of such vastly different transmission figures by apparently the same ND numbers could lead to a serious eye accident. It might also destroy a camera if a photographic ND filter were used.

With a correct solar filter one should look at a 60 or 100 watt old fashioned clear tungsten bulb. I think a pearl tungsten bulb might also work. I will check.The filament should just be visible but not much else.
One can also check for pinholes using the tungsten bulb.

Can someone explain to me why Baader and perhaps others are using ND numbers so vastly different to photographic ND numbers?

In photographic circles I think Optical Density is used where Baader uses ND.
This confusion needs to be addressed before someone has a serious accident.

Regards, David
David Frydman
Posts: 5363
Joined: Mon Jan 18, 2010 9:25 am
Contact:

Re: Saturn.....

Post by David Frydman »

According to Wikipedia a photographic ND 4 filter has a transmission of 0.25.
So a ND 3 filter would be about 0.4 transmission and a ND 5 about 0.2 transmission.
A ND 8192 has an Optical Density of 3.9 and a transmission of 0.00012 or 13 f stops.

What is so dangerous about the use of vastly different ND numbers in photographic and with Baader filters is that nowadays one can buy variable ND filters I think from about ND 3 to ND 10 for photography.
Even ND 10 photographic is dangerous for visual observation of the Sun. Common ND filters are available from many sources, say Hoya and Kood and own brand camera makes.
But B and W (Schneider) German made high quality ND photographic filters are made in odd numbers such as ND 3 and ND 5 I think.
These could be confused with the Baader ND numbers.

I just used a welders glass 13 to view light bulbs. This is approx. equal to a Baader ND 5. I will check.
The welders glass 13 can be used to carefully view the Sun with unaided eyes, tilting it if necessary. the large size is preferable.

A low energy globe bulb 15w/75W equivalent is just visible as a dim round glow.
A 7w/40W equivalent low energy candle bulb is invisible.
A 60W tungsten long life pearl candle bulb is dimly visible.
I did not have a clear tungsten 60W handy, but I know with these the filament is clearly visible with the welders 13 and not much else.
These clear 60 W tungsten bulbs are the best lamps for checking visual solar filters and for pinholes including eclipse glasses from impeccable sources.
They will probably also be good for checking Baader ND 5 solar film, although I don't have any of this to test.

Regards, David
smerral
Posts: 1363
Joined: Sun Oct 25, 2009 3:56 pm
Location: Caithness
Contact:

Re: Saturn.....

Post by smerral »

One thing that bothers me is that looking on the Baader filter site given above it describes the material as ND 3.0 and ND 5.0.
There is the possibility of serious confusion here as a photographic filter of ND 3 transmits I think about 0.1 of full sunshine. I will check.
The Astro ND 5.0 is meant to transmit I think 0.00001 of full sunlight whereas a photographic ND 5 transmits again around 0.1 of full sunlight.
Thanks for making that point David - it's an important one. If in doubt, it's best to phone the supplier and have a chat. I myself bought a dedicated solar filter specifically for visual.
BRIAN
Celestron Nexstar 8SE, Ioptron CEM 25P mount
Altair Astro 102 ED refractor with Lunt B600 CaK diagonal
Coronado PST DS, Daystar Quark
ZWO ASI120MM camera, Canon 1000D (astro modified), Starlight Express SXV H9-C.
Gallery: http://www.astrobin.com/users/smerral/
David Frydman
Posts: 5363
Joined: Mon Jan 18, 2010 9:25 am
Contact:

Re: Saturn.....

Post by David Frydman »

There is even further confusion.
I think the ND 3 to ND 10 variable ND filter may actually refer to the f stop reduction of 3 to 10 f stops.
This is not equivalent to either the Baader ND numbers or the photographic ND numbers or indeed the photographic Optical Density numbers.
So I think this is a complete mess.

So make sure that when viewing or imaging the Sun you have the correct filters and check them visually with a 60 Watt tungsten clear filament bulb and use an infra red T.V. remote to try to change the T.V. channels or other T.V. features.
If you can change the channels on a T.V. using the infra red remote I would not use that filter.

Regards, David
Post Reply