Date   

Validity of APPM model versus failed points

Worsel
 

Ray Gralak

I am trying to improve the 'resolution' of an APPM model by increasing the number of points.

How does APPM manage failed points when building a model?  APPM can fail to plate solve some points for any number of reasons, e.g. low altitude, obstruction, refraction, clouds, etc.  How many failed points can I have, say in a 200 point model, and still have a valid model? 

Thanks!

Bryan


Re: Dumb question about APPM

Ray Gralak
 

Hi Dean,

When using the full sky model derived from the APPM mapping run, when should a meridian flip be executed?
APCC and APPM can also map data points with counterweight up! Thus some parts of the sky can have a different model depending on the pier side.

To do this you need to setup Meridian Limits, which provides a way to automatically change the mount's flip point based on declination.

APPM will automatically map counterweight up points once you setup Meridian limits and enable "Use APCC Meridian Limits" in APPM.

BTW, providing mapping to counterweight-up points is unique to Astro-Physics sky modeling (e.g. TPoint and 10 Micron models can't do this).

-Ray Gralak
Author of APCC (Astro-Physics Command Center): https://www.astro-physics.com/apcc-pro
Author of PEMPro V3: https://www.ccdware.com
Author of Astro-Physics V2 ASCOM Driver: https://www.siriusimaging.com/apdriver

-----Original Message-----
From: main@ap-gto.groups.io [mailto:main@ap-gto.groups.io] On Behalf Of Dean Jacobsen
Sent: Saturday, June 6, 2020 2:22 PM
To: main@ap-gto.groups.io
Subject: Re: [ap-gto] Dumb question about APPM

On Sat, Jun 6, 2020 at 09:39 AM, Ray Gralak wrote:


If you want to test plate solves in the daytime, select "NASA SkyView (Internet)" for the camera type. APPM
will pull an image from the Nasa SkyView website at the mount's current RA/Dec and with the correct image scale,
which can be configured on the Plate Solve Settings tab. Of course then make sure to uncheck the option to skip
plate solves! :-)

The test run worked fine. Now to execute under the stars.

Another dumb question...

When using the full sky model derived from the APPM mapping run, when should a meridian flip be executed? As I
am following an object higher in the east I assume the model is using the mapped points on the east side of the
mount to calculate the tracking rate. Then the object crosses the meridian so I assume that I want to take advantage
of the modeling of the mapped points on the west side of the meridian as the object moves into the west and then
down.

So, when should I flip the mount?

--
Dean Jacobsen
http://astrophoto.net/wp/ <http://astrophoto.net/wp/>
Image Gallery - http://astrophoto.net/wp/image-gallery/
Astrobin - https://www.astrobin.com/users/deanjacobsen/ <https://www.astrobin.com/users/deanjacobsen/>


Re: Mount is "lost"

Michael Hamburg
 

From my limited knowledge of SharpCap, it's not suitable for very long focal lengths.
Michael 


On Sat, Jun 6, 2020 at 3:47 PM, Dale Ghent
<daleg@...> wrote:

The Polemaster is designed to get you pretty close, but resolution limitations of the small focal length of its C-mount lens will naturally impart a limit to its accuracy. I would say that it alone is sufficient for < 400mm focal lengths.

I use the Polemaster on my mounts to get a close PA, then I switch to ShapCap's wonderful PA tool to quickly dial it in. Recent versions of SharpCap support using ASTAP as the solver, so the process is quick with near-instance solves. The bonus to this is that ShapCap is also syncing the solved coordinates to the mount while it's doing this, so that part of setting up is taken care of at the same time.

I do use PHD2's drift align tool when I'm imaging from a spot in my yard where Polaris isn't visible. It's accurate as well but getting used to using it is much more involved and it's easy to get confused. If one wants to try these tools and Polaris is visible, I would recommend starting with SharpCap (combined with ASTAP) over PHD2.

/dale

> On Jun 5, 2020, at 4:24 PM, Brian Valente <bvalente@...> wrote:
>
> I'm already not going back to the polemaster app!
>
> the main problem i found with polemaster is that it's just not that accurate. around 30 arcsec but with my main camera/ota and sharpcap i can usually get 5-10arcsec
>
> On Fri, Jun 5, 2020 at 12:47 PM Leszek <leszek@...> wrote:
> A word of caution though.  Once you try sharpcap with polemaster you will never go back to the QHY polemaster app. :)  I only use the polemaster app on my android phone if I'm in a remote location without my computer.
>
>
>
>
> --
> Brian
>
>
>
> Brian Valente
> portfolio brianvalentephotography.com
>




Re: APCC Pro Documentation

 

As I mentioned in my other post, it is best not to download a new version until it is released or you might run into unanticipated issues.

 

Clear Skies,

 

Marj Christen

Astro-Physics, Inc

11250 Forest Hills Rd

Machesney Park, IL 61115

Phone: 815-282-1513

Fax: 815-282-9847

www.astro-physics.com

 

From: main@ap-gto.groups.io [mailto:main@ap-gto.groups.io] On Behalf Of Jerome Allison
Sent: Friday, June 05, 2020 10:40 PM
To: main@ap-gto.groups.io
Subject: Re: [ap-gto] APCC Pro Documentation

 

You can use this link to get it:

http://www.apastrosoftware.com/apcc_download/APCC_Pro_Setup_1.8.3.1.exe

I had to take a guess at it, but the similarity to the 1.8.2.1 version address worked.

Jerome


Re: APCC Standard v1.8.2.0 and APCC Pro v1.8.2.1

 

Bryan and others,

 

Sometimes, a user will report an issue to Ray. Ray will fix the issue and then provide the user with a build to verify that it works. There is no point in releasing that build before the user verifies that the fix was made. As Ray said, sometimes another change needs to be made to the code before release.

 

It would be best not to download new versions until Ray actually releases them. Otherwise, you could download a problem you weren’t anticipating.

 

I hope this helps.

 

Clear Skies,

 

Marj Christen

Astro-Physics, Inc

11250 Forest Hills Rd

Machesney Park, IL 61115

Phone: 815-282-1513

Fax: 815-282-9847

www.astro-physics.com

 

From: main@ap-gto.groups.io [mailto:main@ap-gto.groups.io] On Behalf Of Worsel via groups.io
Sent: Saturday, June 06, 2020 11:52 AM
To: main@ap-gto.groups.io
Subject: Re: [ap-gto] APCC Standard v1.8.2.0 and APCC Pro v1.8.2.1

 

Ray

There are several of us that have made the same observation in this thread about the lack of notification.  That reduces the likelihood of MS or AV being the cause.  What info can we provide to help suss this out?

One common factor may be APPC Pro versus Standard, which strikes me as odd, since they likely use the same mechanism.

P.S.  What is your process for getting feedback, if the users do not know about the new build?

Bryan


Re: Dumb question about APPM

Dean Jacobsen
 
Edited

On Sat, Jun 6, 2020 at 09:39 AM, Ray Gralak wrote:
If you want to test plate solves in the daytime, select "NASA SkyView (Internet)" for the camera type. APPM will pull an image from the Nasa SkyView website at the mount's current RA/Dec and with the correct image scale, which can be configured on the Plate Solve Settings tab. Of course then make sure to uncheck the option to skip plate solves! :-)
The test run worked fine.  Now to execute under the stars.

Another dumb question...

When using the full sky model derived from the APPM mapping run, when should a meridian flip be executed?  As I am following an object higher in the east  I assume the model is using the mapped points on the east side of the mount to calculate the tracking rate.  Then the object crosses the meridian so I assume that I want to take advantage of the modeling of the mapped points on the west side of the meridian as the object moves into the west and then down. 

So, when should I flip the mount?

Is it OK to go 1/2 hour or one hour master the meridian before executing a flip?
 
--
Dean Jacobsen
http://astrophoto.net/wp/ 
Image Gallery - http://astrophoto.net/wp/image-gallery/
Astrobin - https://www.astrobin.com/users/deanjacobsen/ 


Re: NGC5371 and surrounding galaxies

Worsel
 

Sebastien

The amount of drift, measured in arc-seconds per unit time, will depend only on the mount. How that drift appears in an image will be a function of the scope and camera.

Bryn


Re: APCC Standard v1.8.2.0 and APCC Pro v1.8.2.1

Worsel
 

Ray

Thanks!

Bryan


Re: Mount is "lost"

Dale Ghent
 

The Polemaster is designed to get you pretty close, but resolution limitations of the small focal length of its C-mount lens will naturally impart a limit to its accuracy. I would say that it alone is sufficient for < 400mm focal lengths.

I use the Polemaster on my mounts to get a close PA, then I switch to ShapCap's wonderful PA tool to quickly dial it in. Recent versions of SharpCap support using ASTAP as the solver, so the process is quick with near-instance solves. The bonus to this is that ShapCap is also syncing the solved coordinates to the mount while it's doing this, so that part of setting up is taken care of at the same time.

I do use PHD2's drift align tool when I'm imaging from a spot in my yard where Polaris isn't visible. It's accurate as well but getting used to using it is much more involved and it's easy to get confused. If one wants to try these tools and Polaris is visible, I would recommend starting with SharpCap (combined with ASTAP) over PHD2.

/dale

On Jun 5, 2020, at 4:24 PM, Brian Valente <bvalente@gmail.com> wrote:

I'm already not going back to the polemaster app!

the main problem i found with polemaster is that it's just not that accurate. around 30 arcsec but with my main camera/ota and sharpcap i can usually get 5-10arcsec

On Fri, Jun 5, 2020 at 12:47 PM Leszek <leszek@pkp.net> wrote:
A word of caution though. Once you try sharpcap with polemaster you will never go back to the QHY polemaster app. :) I only use the polemaster app on my android phone if I'm in a remote location without my computer.




--
Brian



Brian Valente
portfolio brianvalentephotography.com


Re: NGC5371 and surrounding galaxies

Roland Christen
 

I'm not into pixels, I'm more looking at allowable arc seconds. The skies some nights allow you to capture 3 arc sec FWHM, but on good nights you can get perhaps 1.5 arc sec FWHM. With a shorter scope you might only be able to get 4 arc sec FWHM on even the best of nights. So, the amount of allowable drift changes with the resolution capabilities of the scope and your local seeing conditions.

Rolando



-----Original Message-----
From: Seb@stro <sebastiendore1@...>
To: main@ap-gto.groups.io <main@ap-gto.groups.io>
Sent: Sat, Jun 6, 2020 10:30 am
Subject: Re: [ap-gto] NGC5371 and surrounding galaxies

Focal length has nothing to do with how long to do unguided. Unguided depends on how well your model is made and how much drift you are willing to accept in your image. 

Rolando, I'm not sure I'm getting this right. I'm probably missing something about the modeling part here... Please enlighten me.

I thought the "amount of drift I'm willing to accept" was the amount of recorded signal (pixels) that is "offset" in the frame due to the mount's (in)ability to accurately track an object,(isn't it why we usually guide ?) which is also related to the image scale, which in turn relates to the focal length of the telescope...

So I'm not sure how two scopes with different focal lengths would lead to the same amount of drift in an unguided sub of the same exposure time (all other parameters being equal). Seems to me that the more focal length, the more drift (pixel offsets over time) I get, wether it's caused by PE (which I understand is not an issue with AE) or bad PA.

Sorry if my question seems silly, I'm a kind of "advanced newbie in astrophotography" as I like to call myself... 😉


Regards,

Sebastien


Re: APCC Standard v1.8.2.0 and APCC Pro v1.8.2.1

Ray Gralak
 

Bryan,

Offhand I can't think of anything besides the version of .Net Framework that is different between PEMPro and APCC. Of course standard and pro APCC use the exact same routine and .Net Framework version.

That said, this weekend I need to finish a build for PEMPro that will work with the 62MP Sony sensors so it will have to wait until next week before I can take a look at the "check for updates" logic again.

-Ray Gralak
Author of APCC (Astro-Physics Command Center): https://www.astro-physics.com/apcc-pro
Author of PEMPro V3: https://www.ccdware.com
Author of Astro-Physics V2 ASCOM Driver: https://www.siriusimaging.com/apdriver

-----Original Message-----
From: main@ap-gto.groups.io [mailto:main@ap-gto.groups.io] On Behalf Of Worsel via groups.io
Sent: Saturday, June 6, 2020 9:52 AM
To: main@ap-gto.groups.io
Subject: Re: [ap-gto] APCC Standard v1.8.2.0 and APCC Pro v1.8.2.1

Ray

There are several of us that have made the same observation in this thread about the lack of notification. That
reduces the likelihood of MS or AV being the cause. What info can we provide to help suss this out?

One common factor may be APPC Pro versus Standard, which strikes me as odd, since they likely use the same
mechanism.

P.S. What is your process for getting feedback, if the users do not know about the new build?

Bryan


Re: APCC Standard v1.8.2.0 and APCC Pro v1.8.2.1

Worsel
 

Ray

There are several of us that have made the same observation in this thread about the lack of notification.  That reduces the likelihood of MS or AV being the cause.  What info can we provide to help suss this out?

One common factor may be APPC Pro versus Standard, which strikes me as odd, since they likely use the same mechanism.

P.S.  What is your process for getting feedback, if the users do not know about the new build?

Bryan


Re: Dumb question about APPM

Dean Jacobsen
 

Aha!  Very cool.  I will definitely give it a trial run in the garage.  Thanks Ray.
--
Dean Jacobsen
http://astrophoto.net/wp/ 
Image Gallery - http://astrophoto.net/wp/image-gallery/
Astrobin - https://www.astrobin.com/users/deanjacobsen/ 


Re: Dumb question about APPM

Ray Gralak
 

Dean,

A few more tips:

* If you want to see the order of the plate solves, enable the "Show Order" checkbox. You can animate the point order by clicking the "animate" button. This is just purely a visual display. You don't need to be connected to the mount or a camera.

* If you want to do a daytime test of APPM connected to the mount, on APPM's "Run" tab enable the "Skip Plate Solves (for Testing)" check box.

* If you want to test plate solves in the daytime, select "NASA SkyView (Internet)" for the camera type. APPM will pull an image from the Nasa SkyView website at the mount's current RA/Dec and with the correct image scale, which can be configured on the Plate Solve Settings tab. Of course then make sure to uncheck the option to skip plate solves! :-)

-Ray Gralak
Author of APCC (Astro-Physics Command Center): https://www.astro-physics.com/apcc-pro
Author of PEMPro V3: https://www.ccdware.com
Author of Astro-Physics V2 ASCOM Driver: https://www.siriusimaging.com/apdriver

-----Original Message-----
From: main@ap-gto.groups.io [mailto:main@ap-gto.groups.io] On Behalf Of Dean Jacobsen
Sent: Saturday, June 6, 2020 9:15 AM
To: main@ap-gto.groups.io
Subject: Re: [ap-gto] Dumb question about APPM

Thanks for the pointers Ray. I will definitely use the horizon limits feature.
--
Dean Jacobsen
http://astrophoto.net/wp/ <http://astrophoto.net/wp/>
Image Gallery - http://astrophoto.net/wp/image-gallery/
Astrobin - https://www.astrobin.com/users/deanjacobsen/ <https://www.astrobin.com/users/deanjacobsen/>


Re: APCC Standard v1.8.2.0 and APCC Pro v1.8.2.1

Ray Gralak
 

Perhaps there is another mechanism to check for updates within APCC that doesn't use any .net protocols. For
example, from my experience, PEMPro always alerts me when there are available updates.
PEMPro and APCC use exactly the same mechanism which leads me to believe, at least in your case, either Windows firewall or your AV program is blocking APCC.

-Ray Gralak
Author of APCC (Astro-Physics Command Center): https://www.astro-physics.com/apcc-pro
Author of PEMPro V3: https://www.ccdware.com
Author of Astro-Physics V2 ASCOM Driver: https://www.siriusimaging.com/apdriver


-----Original Message-----
From: main@ap-gto.groups.io [mailto:main@ap-gto.groups.io] On Behalf Of Cheng-Yang Tan via groups.io
Sent: Friday, June 5, 2020 8:33 PM
To: main@ap-gto.groups.io
Subject: Re: [ap-gto] APCC Standard v1.8.2.0 and APCC Pro v1.8.2.1

Hi Ray,
Perhaps there is another mechanism to check for updates within APCC that doesn't use any .net protocols. For
example, from my experience, PEMPro always alerts me when there are available updates.

cytan

On Friday, June 5, 2020, 10:28:51 PM CDT, Jerome Allison <jallison@netdoor.com> wrote:


Hi Ray,

I'm glad you're still updating APCC, but I wish you would announce the new versions here or anywhere.

From another user's problem, I happened to find out today that there is a new 1.8.3.1 version.

Along with others, my install of APCC never alerts to a new version. All I ever get is:

"You are running this version of APCC: 1.8.2.1" (whatever version it might be)
"The latest version of APCC is:"
(BLANK LINE)
"OK" button

I hope you will try to inform those of us in this situation.

Jerome


Re: APCC Standard v1.8.2.0 and APCC Pro v1.8.2.1

Ray Gralak
 

I'm glad you're still updating APCC, but I wish you would announce the new versions here or anywhere.
I won't always announce every build immediately. It depends on the criticality of the build and if I would like to get feedback first before announcing it. I may even skip announcing a version if it looks like another needs to be released soon.

-Ray Gralak
Author of APCC (Astro-Physics Command Center): https://www.astro-physics.com/apcc-pro
Author of PEMPro V3: https://www.ccdware.com
Author of Astro-Physics V2 ASCOM Driver: https://www.siriusimaging.com/apdriver


-----Original Message-----
From: main@ap-gto.groups.io [mailto:main@ap-gto.groups.io] On Behalf Of Jerome Allison
Sent: Friday, June 5, 2020 8:29 PM
To: main@ap-gto.groups.io
Subject: Re: [ap-gto] APCC Standard v1.8.2.0 and APCC Pro v1.8.2.1

Hi Ray,

I'm glad you're still updating APCC, but I wish you would announce the new versions here or anywhere.

From another user's problem, I happened to find out today that there is a new 1.8.3.1 version.

Along with others, my install of APCC never alerts to a new version. All I ever get is:

"You are running this version of APCC: 1.8.2.1" (whatever version it might be)
"The latest version of APCC is:"
(BLANK LINE)
"OK" button

I hope you will try to inform those of us in this situation.

Jerome


Re: Dumb question about APPM

Dean Jacobsen
 

Thanks for the pointers Ray.   I will definitely use the horizon limits feature.
--
Dean Jacobsen
http://astrophoto.net/wp/ 
Image Gallery - http://astrophoto.net/wp/image-gallery/
Astrobin - https://www.astrobin.com/users/deanjacobsen/ 


Re: Dumb question about APPM

Ray Gralak
 

Hi Dean,

 

> So, for the purpose of collecting measurement points, is there any need to set the Min. Altitude to anything less than

> 45 degrees or maybe 40 degrees?

 

No, there isn't.

 

> With the Min. Altitude selector set to 40 degrees, the medium map default points are significantly less than with the

> selector off [57 vs. 155].

 

You can increase the density of either RA or Dec points by changing the "Declination Spacing" and "Right Ascension Spacing" sliders. You can create quite dense models very easily by decreasing the spacing of either of these.

> The only exception to my usual practice is where I am imaging high in the north where I may start objects 1/2 hour

> earlier than 45 degrees altitude.

 

If you create Horizon limits in APCC, APPM can use them if you enabled the "Use APPCC Horizon Limits".

 

Below is a screen shot with these items highlighted. Notice in the map that I have elected to use my Horizon limits so APPM requires both the Min Altitude (31 degrees in this case), and the horizon limits to define points.

 

 

-Ray Gralak

Author of APCC (Astro-Physics Command Center): https://www.astro-physics.com/apcc-pro

Author of PEMPro V3:  https://www.ccdware.com

Author of Astro-Physics V2 ASCOM Driver: https://www.siriusimaging.com/apdriver

 

> -----Original Message-----

> From: main@ap-gto.groups.io [mailto:main@ap-gto.groups.io] On Behalf Of Dean Jacobsen

> Sent: Saturday, June 6, 2020 8:13 AM

> To: main@ap-gto.groups.io

> Subject: [ap-gto] Dumb question about APPM

>

> I'm reading the APCC/APPM manual and setting up the software for a trip out to the observatory next week where I

> will try to get pointing and tracking correction enabled on the Mach2 for the first time.

>

> I was wondering about settings in the measurement points tab of APPM...

>

> Because of light pollution domes to the east and the west, I only start imaging when my object is at least 45 degrees

> high in the eastern sky and I never follow the object below 45 degrees altitude in the western sky.

>

> So, for the purpose of collecting measurement points, is there any need to set the Min. Altitude to anything less than

> 45 degrees or maybe 40 degrees?

>

> With the Min. Altitude selector set to 40 degrees, the medium map default points are significantly less than with the

> selector off [57 vs. 155].

>

> The only exception to my usual practice is where I am imaging high in the north where I may start objects 1/2 hour

> earlier than 45 degrees altitude.

> --

> Dean Jacobsen

> http://astrophoto.net/wp/  <http://astrophoto.net/wp/>

> Image Gallery - http://astrophoto.net/wp/image-gallery/

> Astrobin - https://www.astrobin.com/users/deanjacobsen/  <https://www.astrobin.com/users/deanjacobsen/>


Re: NGC5371 and surrounding galaxies

Sébastien Doré
 

Focal length has nothing to do with how long to do unguided. Unguided depends on how well your model is made and how much drift you are willing to accept in your image. 

Rolando, I'm not sure I'm getting this right. I'm probably missing something about the modeling part here... Please enlighten me.

I thought the "amount of drift I'm willing to accept" was the amount of recorded signal (pixels) that is "offset" in the frame due to the mount's (in)ability to accurately track an object,(isn't it why we usually guide ?) which is also related to the image scale, which in turn relates to the focal length of the telescope...

So I'm not sure how two scopes with different focal lengths would lead to the same amount of drift in an unguided sub of the same exposure time (all other parameters being equal). Seems to me that the more focal length, the more drift (pixel offsets over time) I get, wether it's caused by PE (which I understand is not an issue with AE) or bad PA.

Sorry if my question seems silly, I'm a kind of "advanced newbie in astrophotography" as I like to call myself... 😉


Regards,

Sebastien


Dumb question about APPM

Dean Jacobsen
 

I'm reading the APCC/APPM manual and setting up the software for a trip out to the observatory next week where I will try to get pointing and tracking correction enabled on the Mach2 for the first time.

I was wondering about settings in the measurement points tab of APPM...

Because of light pollution domes to the east and the west, I only start imaging when my object is at least 45 degrees high in the eastern sky and I never follow the object below 45 degrees altitude in the western sky.

So, for the purpose of collecting measurement points, is there any need to set the Min. Altitude to anything less than 45 degrees or maybe 40 degrees?

With the Min. Altitude selector set to 40 degrees, the medium map default points are significantly less than with the selector off [57 vs. 155].

The only exception to my usual practice is where I am imaging high in the north where I may start objects 1/2 hour earlier than 45 degrees altitude.
--
Dean Jacobsen
http://astrophoto.net/wp/ 
Image Gallery - http://astrophoto.net/wp/image-gallery/
Astrobin - https://www.astrobin.com/users/deanjacobsen/ 

15441 - 15460 of 86336