![]() But I'll certainly run an extension cord for longer captures (like when I was looking for remnants of Ethan's Impact). Both machines have SSDs (a SATA-III Sandisk Extreme Pro running at 6 Gbps in the MacBook Pro case), but I tried a RAM disk anyway. Version 1.3 peaks at around 10 fps at short exposures, but averages about 8.6 fps for the Jupiter settings. I've done a fair bit of experimenting on indoor targets to quantify the performance range of AstroDSLR on both my old MacBook Pro and my wife's newish MacBook Air. Does your Mac suffer the same reduction in speed on battery? Sadly, no. I now run a long extension cord from the garage now to give me 20 fps capture speed. On my pc, I get a 25% cut in captured frame rate when I run my laptop on battery, despite my best efforts to track the source. I just worry you could be throwing away a lot of good frames that aren’t in the 7 stacks you didn’t end up using for this image (assuming I understood your methods correctly).ĭespite what I said above, I still reckon this is a really good image, just wondering if there’s still more to give? Second, why the 50% reduction in image size from captured? I blew up your image 200% and it still looks great! I know you like to quote Airy disk resolutions and such, but hell, this is Art more than Science now!ĭid you capture all 9 videos continuously? If so, why did you not combine them all into a single video and stack the best 25/50% of the lot all at once? I tried doing a comparison of a single 20000 frame (8 min) video of Jupiter vs 4x 5000 frame videos using the same data (albeit stacked in WinJupos) but found absolutely no difference in the final result. ![]() Does your Mac suffer the same reduction in speed on battery? Feel free to ignore some (or all) of them, I just reckon there’s more to extract from this data. While I acknowledge your extensive experience in this area (much more than me), I wonder if there are a couple things you might wish to try. Really good result BQ, would this be one of your best? Great colours, good sharpening but still smooth with little noise. If the disk were more interesting, it might be worth finding a repeatable way to mitigate both.Įdited by BQ Octantis, 12 August 2019 - 02:55 AM. There's an edge artifact around the rim of the disk, too, but it's not too distracting. My only complaint about the fractional wavelets is that the Lynkeos will use negative black values for the result, which makes it a challenge to find where the C-ring ends (and you can see the weird artifact it left in the right gap between the disk and the C-ring). I then scaled by 50% back to full sensor resolution. I was hoping to do an animation, but the seeing just wasn't there in the rest of the shots.Īs to the detail, I stacked each interval at 2× in Lynkeos and then used a set of 8 wavelets at a step interval of 1.5 to sharpen: I shot a sequence of 9×200 second intervals (9 because that's when my laptop battery runs out), stacked and processed them individually (the best 1024 out of 1720), and then picked the best two to combine (with simple 50% layer stack in Photoshop). This was a stack of 2048 frames out of 3440 over 400 seconds. Thanks to all for the feedback and likes!
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |