I'm at 1680 x 1050 (Apple Cinema). The overwriting occurs at all font sizes. I'm a novice at html (actually below novice if that's possible), but the source code at Starfish shows a lot of absolute

Bob Piatek <bobtek@...> wrote: Displays fine here, IE7 and Vista, 1900x1200. "Full text available to premium subscribers only" Paul Gustafson

Alan, No problem here - I'm using IE7 @ 1280 x 800 and 96 dpi. The links display correctly. You may have to change screen settings, if there is overlap. Some websites have this kind of problem - e.g.

The site was fine by me running a vista and firefox set-up. Murray Bob Piatek <bobtek@...> wrote: Well, the WEB page being messed up is puzzling. I've tested with

Well, the WEB page being messed up is puzzling. I've tested with IE, Firefox, and Safari and it looks good on my system. I presume this means it is not a browser related issue. Maybe differences

In a message dated 03/31/08 13:38:40 Central Daylight Time, mphammick@... writes: Would not the the best of both worlds be a system that allows you to select both the exposure time and the

dan kowall wrote: Dan, The following page ? http://www.fishcamp.com/starfish_shootout.html Regards Bill

Dan, Alan, Bob, FYI, I don't have any problems with the Fishcamp website, either with Firefox (2.0.0.13) nor with IE 6.0.2900.xxxx on an IBM Thinkpad T43 Laptop running XP 1024x768...all pretty much

I've seen these problems before and it had to do with screen resolution. Try maybe 1024x768. On my monitors at the suggested max 1680x1050, all is well. Are you using normal font size or larger?

I have the same problem. I'm using Firefox. dan kowall Alan Voetsch <alan_voetsch@...> wrote: Internet Explorer. Alan --- Bob Piatek <bobtek@...> wrote:

Murray, On your first question, I think the telescope mount manufacturers are doing what they do best. I've owned several AP mounts and can't think of a lot of ways they could improve. Maybe

Internet Explorer. Alan --- Bob Piatek <bobtek@...> wrote: Astrophotography: http://www.pbase.com/avoetsch12952

Bob, Two questions - and thanks for your comments. I am the guilty one for setting this hare running. Would not the the best of both worlds be a system that allows you to select both the

Alan, I made the web site but did not check with every browser. There probably is a problem. What web browser are you using. I'll check it out on my end. Bob Piatek

Hey Bob, I wonder if it just my computer, but there are several areas in this link where text is covered by other text making it nearly impoossible to read. Alan --- Bob Piatek <bobtek@...>

This is an interesting thread. Though I've gotten in late on the discussion, a few points come to mind: 1) Although a guide camera may be able to take exposures as short as 20mS, this will result

Actually, the SSAG is based on a relatively inexpensive CMOS imager, not a CCD. I don't know if Orion used it in a previous product. I believe the Starfish guider by Fishcamp Engineering uses the

Hi Murray, To answer your question, the main reason for allowing short exposures is for non-astro imaging. The cmos imaging and associated driver chips are general purpose and marketed for all sorts

The Orion SSAG is actually a repackaged version of an older CCD camera. I have seen some stunning views of the moon taken with it - so I can only assume that it can be an effective CCD. More than

Can this camera work like a webcam and capture many frames per second to do planet imaging? Just a thought. Larry calculation. autoguider has the ability to sample as often as up to 20 times