Back to forums

Jupiter with a good astrocamera

ToupTek ATR3 CMOS 26000 KPA CMOS Planetary Camera Request for feedback Jupiter
5 replies•457 views
What is the reason for absense of "crisp"?
Multiple choice poll 24 votes
21% (5 votes)
46% (11 votes)
17% (4 votes)
4% (1 vote)
13% (3 votes)
You must be logged in to vote in this poll.
Alien_Enthusiast avatar
Alien_Enthusiast avatar
I few days ago I got to try a pretty good astrocamera, ToupTek ATR3 CMOS 26000 KPA to be exact. This was my first time using it, and my first target was Jupiter. However, it seems that the image clarity is slightly off. This could be due to a number of reasons, from poor exposure and gain to post processing. Also keep in minв that the telescope I was using didnt get any cleaning in multiple years, so that might be one of the reasons. 

I stacked 100 RAW images to get this one.

What do you think?



Michael E. avatar
Michael E. avatar
Hi, did you apply any wavelet sharpening? It seems like using Registax could enhance the details if you haven't already.
And could you specify the time interval during which you captured the images? Ideally, it should not exceed 1.5 to 2 minutes if no derotation has been applied.
Well Written Helpful Insightful Concise
andrea tasselli avatar
andrea tasselli avatar
Did you really expect anything better with a measly 100 exposures? Of all the items you listed NONE of them is relevant and the most important is missing: the seeing!

That would have been N.1

N.2 would have been the number of exposure, culled out of the worst ones: that would have been run in the thousands, not in the hundreds.

N.3: Image scale. Yours is way too high from what I can see, which is also related to the fourth:

N.4: Frequency of capture: here is at least 30 fps or higher depending on gain setting and image scale (so it pays off to have it as high as reasonable given the seeing and the scope aperture)

N.5: Length of exposure per image (that is length of captured movie in seconds). Relates to image scale and Jupiter rotation which is pretty fast.

All the items you listed above: none of them matters (well maybe processing does)
Markus A. R. Langlotz avatar
Markus A. R. Langlotz avatar
seeing. seeing. and again seeing. Thats the main reason for planetary images not being crisp.

CS

Markus
John Stone avatar
John Stone avatar
Isn't the IMX571 a deep-sky camera not a planetary camera?

Aren't asi585mc  and asi678mc  based cameras the best planetary camera's currently?
Timothy Prospero avatar
Timothy Prospero avatar
Hi @Alien_Enthusiast,You have a great camera, but it might not be the ideal choice for planetary photography.Its speed and resolution could be limiting factors; for instance, the 26MB sensor might offer excessive resolution while being relatively slow. A quick search on AstroBin reveals that there are no planetary photos taken with this model, which is quite telling.For optimal results in this field, consider using a high-speed camera and  of captpturing at least between 20,000 and 50,000 frames. This would significantly enhance the quality of images of planets.I should mention that I'm not deeply immersed in planetary photography and still consider myself a novice in the broader field of astrophotography. Therefore, please take my advice with a grain of salt.Other experienced photographers have also highlighted the critical role of 'seeing' – the atmospheric condition affecting the visibility of celestial bodies – in achieving quality planetary images. Which it's a vital aspect to consider in Planetary photography.CS
Helpful Respectful Supportive