Checking my understanding
Posted: Wed Feb 14, 2018 10:47 am
Robin,
there has finally been a couple of clear nights where I've been able to use the latest Sharpcap 3.1.
A few things have come to my attention that I need to check with you.
Background:-
I'm using a ZWO ASI1600MM-Cool attached to an f6.5 127mm APO for DSO imaging - mostly - for planetary work its attached to an f/10 Celestron C11.
Up until now I've only been using exposures in the 4 - 12 sec range on the brightest DSOs - so that I can familiarise myself with the camera, Sharpcap and the post processing in Pixinsight.
Situation 1:-
A couple of nights a go I decided that I wanted to check how good the tracking of my mount (Skywatcher EQ8) was and so I started some test exposures - capturing a sequence of 5 frames at each of 4, 8, 15, 30 secs - I was intending to go much further - up to 5 mins or more, but I noticed that above 15 secs I was getting a lot of dropped frames (~50% or more). This was using the 'native' ZWO driver that gets used if I select rhe first instance of the ASI1600 in the drop down list of cameras. So I tried playing with the USB bandwidth - it was initially on 'auto' but I kept reducing it all the way down - but it did not improve matters. I left that part of my evening and went back to my short exposure imaging.
Googling the isue the next morning indicated that I should actually be using the ASCOM driver for longer exposures.
I tried this the follwoing evening and hey presto - no problem - was able to capture sequenbces of frames up to 5 mins, with no drop outs.- didn't need to go any further - started to get some trailing @ 5mins.
Question: - is this the correct behaviour - I must use the ASCOM driver for long exposures?
Situation 2:-
Following on from the above. i had originally performed sensore anlysis on the ASI 1600 using the native driver - seemed to work well and the Brain had been recommending exposures between 8 and 15 seconds - so I had not been seeing any dropped frames in my imaging runs. When I switched to the ASCOM driver - which identifies itself as ASCOM 1 and tried to use the Brain - it told me that I had to perform the sensor analysis again.
Question - I'm guessing that when using the ASCOM driver it is not possible to identify the camera and use the 'other' sensor analysis from the native driver? (My workaround is to switch back to the native driver, measure the background and get the Brain recommendations - then switch back to ASCOM and use the recommended settings - good idea?)
Question - I have 3 ASI cameras - how can I tell Sharpcap which one is being used with the ASCOM driver so that it can use the correct sensor analysis file?
Situation 3
Just an observation really. When doing sensor analysis the measurement sequence is 'camera uncovered', 'camera covered' then 'camera uncovered' again. I'm sure there is a reason for that - or would it be possible to complete all the uncovered measurements in one go, followed by the covered measurement - or vice-versa?
Situation 4.
More of an enhancement request - when using live stacking the individual frames are saved using the generic 'framexxx.' filename - would it be possible to add a timestamp to the name, or provide a customisation feature like you have for other filenames?
Thanks for producing such agreat piece of software.
Regards
Neil
there has finally been a couple of clear nights where I've been able to use the latest Sharpcap 3.1.
A few things have come to my attention that I need to check with you.
Background:-
I'm using a ZWO ASI1600MM-Cool attached to an f6.5 127mm APO for DSO imaging - mostly - for planetary work its attached to an f/10 Celestron C11.
Up until now I've only been using exposures in the 4 - 12 sec range on the brightest DSOs - so that I can familiarise myself with the camera, Sharpcap and the post processing in Pixinsight.
Situation 1:-
A couple of nights a go I decided that I wanted to check how good the tracking of my mount (Skywatcher EQ8) was and so I started some test exposures - capturing a sequence of 5 frames at each of 4, 8, 15, 30 secs - I was intending to go much further - up to 5 mins or more, but I noticed that above 15 secs I was getting a lot of dropped frames (~50% or more). This was using the 'native' ZWO driver that gets used if I select rhe first instance of the ASI1600 in the drop down list of cameras. So I tried playing with the USB bandwidth - it was initially on 'auto' but I kept reducing it all the way down - but it did not improve matters. I left that part of my evening and went back to my short exposure imaging.
Googling the isue the next morning indicated that I should actually be using the ASCOM driver for longer exposures.
I tried this the follwoing evening and hey presto - no problem - was able to capture sequenbces of frames up to 5 mins, with no drop outs.- didn't need to go any further - started to get some trailing @ 5mins.
Question: - is this the correct behaviour - I must use the ASCOM driver for long exposures?
Situation 2:-
Following on from the above. i had originally performed sensore anlysis on the ASI 1600 using the native driver - seemed to work well and the Brain had been recommending exposures between 8 and 15 seconds - so I had not been seeing any dropped frames in my imaging runs. When I switched to the ASCOM driver - which identifies itself as ASCOM 1 and tried to use the Brain - it told me that I had to perform the sensor analysis again.
Question - I'm guessing that when using the ASCOM driver it is not possible to identify the camera and use the 'other' sensor analysis from the native driver? (My workaround is to switch back to the native driver, measure the background and get the Brain recommendations - then switch back to ASCOM and use the recommended settings - good idea?)
Question - I have 3 ASI cameras - how can I tell Sharpcap which one is being used with the ASCOM driver so that it can use the correct sensor analysis file?
Situation 3
Just an observation really. When doing sensor analysis the measurement sequence is 'camera uncovered', 'camera covered' then 'camera uncovered' again. I'm sure there is a reason for that - or would it be possible to complete all the uncovered measurements in one go, followed by the covered measurement - or vice-versa?
Situation 4.
More of an enhancement request - when using live stacking the individual frames are saved using the generic 'framexxx.' filename - would it be possible to add a timestamp to the name, or provide a customisation feature like you have for other filenames?
Thanks for producing such agreat piece of software.
Regards
Neil