Imaging Saturn
Posted: Wed Nov 04, 2026 11:01 pm
Images taken between 9 and 10 pm on 31/10/ 26 with seeing gradually deteriorating.
Orion Optics (UK) VX12 300 mm F4 Newtonian - modified by OO to eliminate flexure, adjustable focuser alignment and resurfaced mirror - Baader clicklock, 2X ED Barlow and Pegasus focuser controller on a CEM70G mount.
ASI 715 MC 1.45 u pixel camera at ~ correct distance from Barlow for 2 X (i.e. ~ 0.137 arcsec/ pixel at F8). Filter was ZWO IR/UV cut filter for visible light image and Astronomik Proplanet 642 filter for far red and near IR images
The visible image comprised seven video .ser captures with Sharpcap at 9.07, 9.09, 9.16, 9.18, 9.19, 9.21 and 9.24 pm comprising a range of capture times from 60s to 120 s and 5400 to ~11000 frames of 11ms at a gain of ~330. Depending on the quality BiggSky selected between 30 and 50% of each capture for stacking. The 7 stacks were deconvolved in BiggSky -- the ROI - based psf first being obtained from the luminance of the aligned channels - and then this used to rerun the colour deconvolution. The seven images were then de-rotated to 9.16 pm and combined together in WinJupos. The combined image was then further slightly wavelet sharpened in PixInsight and finally brightened in Affinity photo. The process for the mono red/IR image was similar except that only 5 images were combined.
The two images both show a 'ring' artifact at the inside perimeter and without the edge of the planet disk. This is likely because all of the captures were somewhat underexposed (because I was overly cautious about including overexposed frames). I note that (as is so often the case) there is a Sharpcap option to match the need that masks overexposed pixels and that could certainly be worth a try next time along with taking the histogram up nearer to 100%. Secondly - based on a few pilot experiments - it was probably a mistake trying to get more frames at the expense of quality. The exposure time of 11 ms was likely too short and 15 or 16 ms probably nearer the sweet spot for Saturn? The IR image likely suffered because conditions had deteriorated further.
Orion Optics (UK) VX12 300 mm F4 Newtonian - modified by OO to eliminate flexure, adjustable focuser alignment and resurfaced mirror - Baader clicklock, 2X ED Barlow and Pegasus focuser controller on a CEM70G mount.
ASI 715 MC 1.45 u pixel camera at ~ correct distance from Barlow for 2 X (i.e. ~ 0.137 arcsec/ pixel at F8). Filter was ZWO IR/UV cut filter for visible light image and Astronomik Proplanet 642 filter for far red and near IR images
The visible image comprised seven video .ser captures with Sharpcap at 9.07, 9.09, 9.16, 9.18, 9.19, 9.21 and 9.24 pm comprising a range of capture times from 60s to 120 s and 5400 to ~11000 frames of 11ms at a gain of ~330. Depending on the quality BiggSky selected between 30 and 50% of each capture for stacking. The 7 stacks were deconvolved in BiggSky -- the ROI - based psf first being obtained from the luminance of the aligned channels - and then this used to rerun the colour deconvolution. The seven images were then de-rotated to 9.16 pm and combined together in WinJupos. The combined image was then further slightly wavelet sharpened in PixInsight and finally brightened in Affinity photo. The process for the mono red/IR image was similar except that only 5 images were combined.
The two images both show a 'ring' artifact at the inside perimeter and without the edge of the planet disk. This is likely because all of the captures were somewhat underexposed (because I was overly cautious about including overexposed frames). I note that (as is so often the case) there is a Sharpcap option to match the need that masks overexposed pixels and that could certainly be worth a try next time along with taking the histogram up nearer to 100%. Secondly - based on a few pilot experiments - it was probably a mistake trying to get more frames at the expense of quality. The exposure time of 11 ms was likely too short and 15 or 16 ms probably nearer the sweet spot for Saturn? The IR image likely suffered because conditions had deteriorated further.