Date   

Re: Dither Sanity check

Matthew Hughes
 

Rolando and Tony,

Thanks. I’ll set say 9 seconds as I was using 3 sec exposures. Adjust as I change exposure length with seeing changes. 
With SGP I don’t think you can select a pixel dither amount. Just high to very high etc.
I’ll read the help file and see what it says about the levels. 
Thankyou again. Love the AE’s. I was guiding at 0.2 to 0.3 RMS last night from my wooden roof top balcony. Amazing.

Regards,

Matt Hughes

On 12 Nov 2017, at 09:43, chris1011@... [ap-gto] <ap-gto@...> wrote:

 

Yes, it should not take more than 2 or 3 guide pulses to settle after a dither. It all depends how far you are dithering. I normally dither between 3 and 5 pixels. When I am taking 5 sec guide exposures I set the delay at 15 seconds after a dither in order to have everything settle down.

Rolando




-----Original Message-----
From: matthughes77@... [ap-gto] <ap-gto@...>
To: ap-gto <ap-gto@...>
Sent: Sat, Nov 11, 2017 3:58 pm
Subject: [ap-gto] Dither Sanity check

Ok after a few months with the AP 1100 AE mount I tried dithering for the first time last night. Selected high dither in SGP Pro and after each 10 min sub. Imaging at 1.96 pix/arcs secs. Each dither took literally 2-3 secs. No time at all. I’ve read in forums it can take 2-3 mins with some mounts. So are my results normal? Is it due to no Dec back lash and quick response of the encoders? I was hesitant to use dithering till now due to the length of time I understood it took. However the response of the mount it was easy and quick. Are my results typical? Or am I missing something... should I use a high dither..? Bewler? Thanks Matt ------------------------------------ Posted by: matthughes77@... ------------------------------------ To UNSUBSCRIBE, or for general information on the ap-gto list see http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ap-gto ------------------------------------ Yahoo Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ap-gto/ <*> Your email settings: Individual Email | Traditional <*> To change settings online go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ap-gto/join (Yahoo! ID required) <*> To change settings via email: ap-gto-digest@... ap-gto-fullfeatured@... <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: ap-gto-unsubscribe@... <*> Your use of Yahoo Groups is subject to: https://info.yahoo.com/legal/us/yahoo/utos/terms/


Re: Dither Sanity check

Matthew Hughes
 

Rolando and Tony,

Thanks. I’ll set say 9 seconds as I was using 3 sec exposures. Adjust as I change exposure length with seeing changes. 
With SGP I don’t think you can select a pixel dither amount. Just high to very high etc.
I’ll read the help file and see what it says about the levels. 
Thankyou again. Love the AE’s. I was guiding at 0.2 to 0.3 RMS last night from my wooden roof top balcony. Amazing.

Regards,

Matt Hughes

On 12 Nov 2017, at 09:43, chris1011@... [ap-gto] <ap-gto@...> wrote:

 

Yes, it should not take more than 2 or 3 guide pulses to settle after a dither. It all depends how far you are dithering. I normally dither between 3 and 5 pixels. When I am taking 5 sec guide exposures I set the delay at 15 seconds after a dither in order to have everything settle down.

Rolando




-----Original Message-----
From: matthughes77@... [ap-gto] <ap-gto@...>
To: ap-gto <ap-gto@...>
Sent: Sat, Nov 11, 2017 3:58 pm
Subject: [ap-gto] Dither Sanity check

Ok after a few months with the AP 1100 AE mount I tried dithering for the first time last night. Selected high dither in SGP Pro and after each 10 min sub. Imaging at 1.96 pix/arcs secs. Each dither took literally 2-3 secs. No time at all. I’ve read in forums it can take 2-3 mins with some mounts. So are my results normal? Is it due to no Dec back lash and quick response of the encoders? I was hesitant to use dithering till now due to the length of time I understood it took. However the response of the mount it was easy and quick. Are my results typical? Or am I missing something... should I use a high dither..? Bewler? Thanks Matt ------------------------------------ Posted by: matthughes77@... ------------------------------------ To UNSUBSCRIBE, or for general information on the ap-gto list see http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ap-gto ------------------------------------ Yahoo Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ap-gto/ <*> Your email settings: Individual Email | Traditional <*> To change settings online go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ap-gto/join (Yahoo! ID required) <*> To change settings via email: ap-gto-digest@... ap-gto-fullfeatured@... <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: ap-gto-unsubscribe@... <*> Your use of Yahoo Groups is subject to: https://info.yahoo.com/legal/us/yahoo/utos/terms/


Re: Dither Sanity check

Tony Benjamin <tonybenjamin@...>
 

I believe some time is recommended. I have mine set at 8 sec on the advice of other SGP users.

 

From: ap-gto@... [mailto:ap-gto@...]
Sent: Saturday, November 11, 2017 2:42 PM
To: ap-gto@...
Subject: Re: [ap-gto] Dither Sanity check

 

 

0.5 pixels. Which I think was default. Should I have a time?

Regards,

 

Matt Hughes


On 12 Nov 2017, at 09:40, 'Tony Benjamin' tonybenjamin@... [ap-gto] <ap-gto@...> wrote:

 

What is your settling time set at?

 

From: ap-gto@... [mailto:ap-gto@...]
Sent: Saturday, November 11, 2017 1:59 PM
To: ap-gto@...
Subject: [ap-gto] Dither Sanity check

 

 

Ok after a few months with the AP 1100 AE mount I tried dithering for the first time last night.
Selected high dither in SGP Pro and after each 10 min sub.
Imaging at 1.96 pix/arcs secs.
Each dither took literally 2-3 secs. No time at all.
I’ve read in forums it can take 2-3 mins with some mounts.

So are my results normal? Is it due to no Dec back lash and quick response of the encoders?
I was hesitant to use dithering till now due to the length of time I understood it took. However the response of the mount it was easy and quick. Are my results typical? Or am I missing something... should I use a high dither..?
Bewler?
Thanks
Matt


Re: Dither Sanity check

Roland Christen
 

Yes, it should not take more than 2 or 3 guide pulses to settle after a dither. It all depends how far you are dithering. I normally dither between 3 and 5 pixels. When I am taking 5 sec guide exposures I set the delay at 15 seconds after a dither in order to have everything settle down.

Rolando



-----Original Message-----
From: matthughes77@... [ap-gto]
To: ap-gto
Sent: Sat, Nov 11, 2017 3:58 pm
Subject: [ap-gto] Dither Sanity check

Ok after a few months with the AP 1100 AE mount I tried dithering for the first time last night. Selected high dither in SGP Pro and after each 10 min sub. Imaging at 1.96 pix/arcs secs. Each dither took literally 2-3 secs. No time at all. I’ve read in forums it can take 2-3 mins with some mounts. So are my results normal? Is it due to no Dec back lash and quick response of the encoders? I was hesitant to use dithering till now due to the length of time I understood it took. However the response of the mount it was easy and quick. Are my results typical? Or am I missing something... should I use a high dither..? Bewler? Thanks Matt ------------------------------------ Posted by: matthughes77@... ------------------------------------ To UNSUBSCRIBE, or for general information on the ap-gto list see http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ap-gto ------------------------------------ Yahoo Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ap-gto/ <*> Your email settings: Individual Email | Traditional <*> To change settings online go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ap-gto/join (Yahoo! ID required) <*> To change settings via email: ap-gto-digest@... ap-gto-fullfeatured@... <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: ap-gto-unsubscribe@... <*> Your use of Yahoo Groups is subject to: https://info.yahoo.com/legal/us/yahoo/utos/terms/


Re: Dither Sanity check

Matthew Hughes
 

0.5 pixels. Which I think was default. Should I have a time?

Regards,

Matt Hughes

On 12 Nov 2017, at 09:40, 'Tony Benjamin' tonybenjamin@... [ap-gto] <ap-gto@...> wrote:

 

What is your settling time set at?

 

From: ap-gto@... [mailto:ap-gto@...]
Sent: Saturday, November 11, 2017 1:59 PM
To: ap-gto@...
Subject: [ap-gto] Dither Sanity check

 

 

Ok after a few months with the AP 1100 AE mount I tried dithering for the first time last night.
Selected high dither in SGP Pro and after each 10 min sub.
Imaging at 1.96 pix/arcs secs.
Each dither took literally 2-3 secs. No time at all.
I’ve read in forums it can take 2-3 mins with some mounts.

So are my results normal? Is it due to no Dec back lash and quick response of the encoders?
I was hesitant to use dithering till now due to the length of time I understood it took. However the response of the mount it was easy and quick. Are my results typical? Or am I missing something... should I use a high dither..?
Bewler?
Thanks
Matt


Re: Dither Sanity check

Tony Benjamin <tonybenjamin@...>
 

What is your settling time set at?

 

From: ap-gto@... [mailto:ap-gto@...]
Sent: Saturday, November 11, 2017 1:59 PM
To: ap-gto@...
Subject: [ap-gto] Dither Sanity check

 

 

Ok after a few months with the AP 1100 AE mount I tried dithering for the first time last night.
Selected high dither in SGP Pro and after each 10 min sub.
Imaging at 1.96 pix/arcs secs.
Each dither took literally 2-3 secs. No time at all.
I’ve read in forums it can take 2-3 mins with some mounts.

So are my results normal? Is it due to no Dec back lash and quick response of the encoders?
I was hesitant to use dithering till now due to the length of time I understood it took. However the response of the mount it was easy and quick. Are my results typical? Or am I missing something... should I use a high dither..?
Bewler?
Thanks
Matt


Dither Sanity check

Matthew Hughes
 

Ok after a few months with the AP 1100 AE mount I tried dithering for the first time last night.
Selected high dither in SGP Pro and after each 10 min sub.
Imaging at 1.96 pix/arcs secs.
Each dither took literally 2-3 secs. No time at all.
I’ve read in forums it can take 2-3 mins with some mounts.

So are my results normal? Is it due to no Dec back lash and quick response of the encoders?
I was hesitant to use dithering till now due to the length of time I understood it took. However the response of the mount it was easy and quick. Are my results typical? Or am I missing something... should I use a high dither..?
Bewler?
Thanks
Matt


Fixed -- The APCC pro screen is out of whack - bottom truncated

steven ho
 

I reconfigured window7 pro to use a larger font and this totally screwed up the APCC UI.


Re: The APCC pro screen is out of whack - bottom truncated

steven ho
 

I should add the  -Resize to original Window Size does not fix it. I uploaded a file with a screen shot.

thanks


The APCC pro screen is out of whack - bottom truncated

steven ho
 

I uninstalled and reinstalled not good. Please Help!!


Re: Ground loops

dan kowall
 

Hi Lance,
As the original poster on the CN forum I would advise reading the CN posts with a strong sense of caution and irony.
As previously noted, any professionals with experience in this area were strongly discouraged from offering advice to anyone concerned with ground loops.
That essentially left the responding field to people who think they know what they're talking about and one or two professionals who weren't afraid of being sued because of offering some general information on the internet.
Ground loops, though low voltage, can affect imaging results and under certain circumstances can cause damage to electronic equipment. It's worth it to spend the time and effort to prevent them.

dan kowall
photonhunter.com


--------------------------------------------

On Thu, 11/9/17, calypte@verizon.net [ap-gto] <ap-gto@yahoogroups.com> wrote:

Subject: [ap-gto] RE: Ground loops
To: ap-gto@yahoogroups.com
Date: Thursday, November 9, 2017, 3:35 AM

Hi, Lance.  Greetings from a fellow Palomar
Observatory docent.  You should go over to the CN
observatories forum.  Within the past few days there has
been a big discussion of grounding issues, including
participation by Chris Erickson.  Unfortunately, you may
find that the more someone knows about electrical
engineering, the more reluctant they may be to offer advice,
since they haven't seen your setup, and they don't
want to be responsible for offering a recommendation that
may work in some cases but not yours.

Posted by: calypte@verizon.net




Reply
via web post


Reply to sender


Reply to group

Start a New
Topic

Messages in this
topic
(10)

To UNSUBSCRIBE, or for general information on the
ap-gto list

see http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ap-gto


Visit Your Group


New Members
9

New Photos
1

• Privacy • Unsubscribe • Terms of Use


Re: APCC Weather Station Support

Gabe Shaughnessy
 

I would also be interested in connectivity with weather underground.  I currently have my own home-built weather station with a cloud sensor and sky quality meter.  If I could push those to WU and pull them using the ASCOM driver for WU, that would make things so much easier.  

Cheers,
Gabe


Re: APCC Weather Station Support

Dale Ghent
 

An ASCOM driver for Wunderground would be interesting; indeed it has the APIs necessary to work with. I can see a few use-cases for it, especially as fall-back if an observatory's own weather station becomes inoperable for some reason.

Another site I would consider integrating with is aviationweather.gov, where an ASCOM ObservationConditions drive could ingest METAR data from a nearby airport that provides it for more exacting condition reports. METAR data is a long text string that any seasoned pilot can decode mentally, but can be decoded handily by such a driver and the derived values acted upon (or not)

An example from my nearby airport:
https://www.aviationweather.gov/metar/data?ids=KGAI&format=decoded

Combined with a local cloud camera, this info could be sufficient for deciding on automated observatory operations in most cases; local weather randomness permitting ;)

At any rate, any of the major weather stations have wireless or IP-based connectivity to them; and an ObservationConditions ASCOM driver would need only to grok the formats that are peculiar to each one.

/dale


On Nov 9, 2017, at 3:19 PM, howard@astro-physics.com [ap-gto] <ap-gto@yahoogroups.com> wrote:



I think Ray is pretty busy finishing up PEMPro 3 at the moment, so I'll chime in on this.
• I have a couple other APCC priorities that need to be placed ahead of further expanded weather support.
• I believe his first planned expansion beyond the current THUM support will be to the ASCOM standard weather interface. As I understand it, that would include the Boltwood and WeatherWatcher for ACP/CCDAP systems, but I'm not sure how all of that will fit together. I'm also not sure at the moment where he stands in terms of completion for the ASCOM interface.
• We have talked about the Davis Weather Stations, but I don't know anything beyond the initial discussion.
• Input from the Weather Underground and from Citizen Weather Observer Program have also both been brought up, but I'm not sure how these could be employed to best advantage.
• What do you all want? If we get a list of desired weather station options put together, we can then do a gto group poll and see which ideas are most popular.




[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]


Re: APCC Weather Station Support

Stephane Charbonnel
 

Hello,

Or using a stickstation USB near optical tube and mount such as http://www.blueastro.se/indexd61c.html?id=5
It could be using with ASCOM IObservingConditions properties and methods.

Regards
Stephane

2017-11-10 23:15 GMT+01:00 'Christopher Erickson' christopher.k.erickson@... [ap-gto] <ap-gto@...>:

 

And setting up a Weather Underground compatible weather station using just about any weather station and the free program Cumulus isn't too hard.
 
 
 
 
I am currently using a Davis Instruments weather station but before that I was using a $150 special from China via eBay.
 
If the weather station supports RS-232 or USB connectivity to a Windows PC and is supported by Cumulus, it will probably work just fine.
 
 
-Christopher Erickson
Observatory engineer
Summit Kinetics
Waikoloa, HI 96738
www.summitkinetics.com
 


From: ap-gto@... [mailto:ap-gto@...]
Sent: Friday, November 10, 2017 11:23 AM
To: ap-gto@...
Subject: [ap-gto] Re: APCC Weather Station Support

Howard,

The ability to query information such as barometric pressure from a nearby Weather Underground station would probably meet the needs of many users.  This information is available via web service and is free for up to 500 queries per day / 10 per hour.  

Thanks,
Dan

Virus-free. www.avg.com



Re: APCC Weather Station Support

Christopher Erickson
 

And setting up a Weather Underground compatible weather station using just about any weather station and the free program Cumulus isn't too hard.
 
 
 
 
I am currently using a Davis Instruments weather station but before that I was using a $150 special from China via eBay.
 
If the weather station supports RS-232 or USB connectivity to a Windows PC and is supported by Cumulus, it will probably work just fine.
 
 
-Christopher Erickson
Observatory engineer
Summit Kinetics
Waikoloa, HI 96738
www.summitkinetics.com
 



From: ap-gto@... [mailto:ap-gto@...]
Sent: Friday, November 10, 2017 11:23 AM
To: ap-gto@...
Subject: [ap-gto] Re: APCC Weather Station Support

Howard,

The ability to query information such as barometric pressure from a nearby Weather Underground station would probably meet the needs of many users.  This information is available via web service and is free for up to 500 queries per day / 10 per hour.  

Thanks,
Dan

Virus-free. www.avg.com


Re: NGC 246 -The Skull Nebula

Terry Robison
 

Thanks Stuart




Re: APCC Weather Station Support

Danny Flippo
 

Howard,

The ability to query information such as barometric pressure from a nearby Weather Underground station would probably meet the needs of many users.  This information is available via web service and is free for up to 500 queries per day / 10 per hour.  

Thanks,
Dan


Re: NGC 246 -The Skull Nebula

Stuart Heggie <stuart.j.heggie@...>
 

Nice one Terry!

Stuart

On Thu, Nov 9, 2017 at 8:47 PM, terry.robison@... [ap-gto] <ap-gto@...> wrote:
 

The Skull Nebula is located in the constellation Cetus.  It is a planetary nebula discovered by William Herschel in 1785.  From our vantage point, it has an angular resolution of 3.7 arcmin.   The estimated diameter is about 2.3 light years, and is at a distance of 1,600 light years from our planet.  The listed magnitude of the nebula is around 11th magnitude, so is has a fairly low surface brightness.   Quite often, visual observers can find the foreground stars overpowering.  The central star is fairly bright at 11.8 magnitude.  The eastern limb of the nebula is brighter suggesting that it is interacting with the interstellar medium.   


Exposure and equipement details in Flickr.


Wide field image:

https://www.flickr.com/photos/97807083@N00/26521553869/in/photostream/


Cropped version:

https://www.flickr.com/photos/97807083@N00/38296831051/in/photostream/


Thanks for looking


Terry






Re: RE : Re: NGC 246 -The Skull Nebula

Terry Robison
 

Thanks Didier


RE : Re: NGC 246 -The Skull Nebula

REDIGER-LIZLOV Didier
 

Hello
A superb image. Many détails and Good processing.

Didier 



Envoyé depuis mon appareil Samsung


-------- Message d'origine --------
De : "chris1011@... [ap-gto]" <ap-gto@...>
Date : 10/11/2017 04:34 (GMT+01:00)
À : ap-gto@...
Objet : Re: [ap-gto] NGC 246 -The Skull Nebula

 

Well that is certainly an excellent image, very sharp and detailed.

Rolando




-----Original Message-----
From: terry.robison@... [ap-gto] <ap-gto@...>
To: ap-gto <ap-gto@...>
Sent: Thu, Nov 9, 2017 7:47 pm
Subject: [ap-gto] NGC 246 -The Skull Nebula



The Skull Nebula is located in the constellation Cetus.  It is a planetary nebula discovered by William Herschel in 1785.  From our vantage point, it has an angular resolution of 3.7 arcmin.   The estimated diameter is about 2.3 light years, and is at a distance of 1,600 light years from our planet.  The listed magnitude of the nebula is around 11th magnitude, so is has a fairly low surface brightness.   Quite often, visual observers can find the foreground stars overpowering.  The central star is fairly bright at 11.8 magnitude.  The eastern limb of the nebula is brighter suggesting that it is interacting with the interstellar medium.   

Exposure and equipement details in Flickr.

Wide field image:

Cropped version:

Thanks for looking

Terry