Saturn with new DMK, grayscale camera

  • Context: Stargazing 
  • Thread starter Thread starter russ_watters
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Camera Saturn
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around astrophotography, specifically focusing on capturing images of Saturn using a DMK grayscale camera. Participants share their experiences and techniques related to photographing planets, the challenges involved, and comparisons with photographing Jupiter.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested
  • Mathematical reasoning

Main Points Raised

  • One participant shares a Saturn photograph taken with a new DMK grayscale camera, describing it as their best yet.
  • Another participant questions the presence of color in a grayscale image, prompting a technical explanation about CCD chips and color generation through separate exposures.
  • Participants discuss the challenges of photographing Saturn and other planets, noting that atmospheric conditions significantly affect resolution.
  • One participant mentions taking thousands of photos to combine them for better detail, likening the camera to an expensive webcam.
  • There is a discussion about the visibility of Jupiter, with one participant noting it is currently behind the sun and suggesting that another participant may be mistaking Venus for Jupiter.
  • Another participant expresses curiosity about the brightness of Venus and its proximity compared to Jupiter, leading to a clarification about Venus being the brightest object in the night sky after the moon.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants generally agree on the challenges of astrophotography and the technical aspects of using a grayscale camera. However, there is some confusion regarding the visibility of planets and their brightness, indicating a lack of consensus on the identification of celestial objects.

Contextual Notes

Participants reference specific atmospheric conditions and personal experiences that may not be universally applicable. The discussion includes assumptions about visibility and identification of celestial bodies that may depend on location and timing.

Who May Find This Useful

Astronomy enthusiasts, amateur astrophotographers, and individuals interested in the technical aspects of photographing celestial objects may find this discussion valuable.

Messages
23,870
Reaction score
11,322
I have a new camera - a DMK, grayscale camera. Here's one of my first Saturn shots with it... My best yet.
 

Attachments

  • Saturn-1a.jpg
    Saturn-1a.jpg
    3.5 KB · Views: 636
Astronomy news on Phys.org


russ_watters said:
I have a new camera - a DMK, grayscale camera. Here's one of my first Saturn shots with it... My best yet.

Nice shot Russ.
 


russ_watters said:
I have a new camera - a DMK, grayscale camera. Here's one of my first Saturn shots with it... My best yet.

Spectacular russ!

If its a grayscale camera why is there colour?
 


Thanks, guys.

Baywax, all CCD chips are single color, but those on normal cameras have a matrix of color filters on them and software to generate the color. I take separate exposures with separate color filters, then mix them with software to generate the color photo. This maximizes the resolution and color depth of the camera/photos.
 


russ_watters said:
I have a new camera - a DMK, grayscale camera. Here's one of my first Saturn shots with it... My best yet.

Awesome shot russ! Almost a straight on view of the rings, which is kinda sad :( (everyone loves the rings! haha) but it really brings out the detail in the planet having them "out of the way".

But GREAT SHOT!

One of these days I'll learn how to take pictures like this...
 


russ_watters said:
Thanks, guys.

Baywax, all CCD chips are single color, but those on normal cameras have a matrix of color filters on them and software to generate the color. I take separate exposures with separate color filters, then mix them with software to generate the color photo. This maximizes the resolution and color depth of the camera/photos.

Very cool russ. Is Saturn a challenge to photograph? I just wondered because Jupiter seems like a sure bet to shoot since its so bright these days. Can you get a good shot of Jupiter and its many moons? Has anything unusual been going with Jupiter after Shoemaker-Levi?
 


baywax said:
Very cool russ. Is Saturn a challenge to photograph?
All planets are a challenge to photograph because the resolution is limited primarily by how steady the atmosphere is - especially where I live. The atmosphere was perhaps the best I've ever seen it that night and it gets close to that maybe 10 nights a year. I take about ten thousand photos at a time via video (my camera is like an expensive webcam) and combine them with software designed to filter out atmospheric distortion to flesh-out the details. It takes some practice and some effort. My website has a tutorial showing what that process looks like: http://www.russsscope.net/staxtutorial.htm
I just wondered because Jupiter seems like a sure bet to shoot since its so bright these days. Can you get a good shot of Jupiter and its many moons?
Jupiter isn't out right now, it is almost directly behind the sun. You may be looking at Venus in the evening if you think you see Jupiter. Jupiter is bigger than Saturn so photos of it will naturally be higher resolution, but for the past few years, it has stayed lower in the sky for those in the northern hemisphere, making it tough to get good detail due to the atmosphere. When it comes around again this summer, I'll post my results.
Has anything unusual been going with Jupiter after Shoemaker-Levi?
No, it left scarring that dissipated in a few months. Amateurs did get a few photos, but that was before the explosion in amateur astrophotography (due to good, cheap cameras), so there weren't many.
 


russ_watters said:
All planets are a challenge to photograph because the resolution is limited primarily by how steady the atmosphere is - especially where I live. The atmosphere was perhaps the best I've ever seen it that night and it gets close to that maybe 10 nights a year. I take about ten thousand photos at a time via video (my camera is like an expensive webcam) and combine them with software designed to filter out atmospheric distortion to flesh-out the details. It takes some practice and some effort. My website has a tutorial showing what that process looks like: http://www.russsscope.net/staxtutorial.htm Jupiter isn't out right now, it is almost directly behind the sun. You may be looking at Venus in the evening if you think you see Jupiter. Jupiter is bigger than Saturn so photos of it will naturally be higher resolution, but for the past few years, it has stayed lower in the sky for those in the northern hemisphere, making it tough to get good detail due to the atmosphere. When it comes around again this summer, I'll post my results. No, it left scarring that dissipated in a few months. Amateurs did get a few photos, but that was before the explosion in amateur astrophotography (due to good, cheap cameras), so there weren't many.

Thank you russ.

Venus...? that is so bright for Venus. Is it closer than usual? Maybe I'm seeing the International Space Station. Except it doesn't move. I'll have to check this out. I'm at the 49th parallel and this planet sets after the sun by about 3 hours. (Obviously not an astronomer eh?!)
 


baywax said:
Thank you russ.

Venus...? that is so bright for Venus. Is it closer than usual? Maybe I'm seeing the International Space Station. Except it doesn't move. I'll have to check this out. I'm at the 49th parallel and this planet sets after the sun by about 3 hours. (Obviously not an astronomer eh?!)

Well Venus is the brightest object in the night sky, save the moon.
 
  • #10


Nabeshin said:
Well Venus is the brightest object in the night sky, save the moon.
No way! So I've been pointing out Venus and calling in Jupiter!? I really thought Jupiter was brightest because of its' number of moons. What's up with Venus? Is this because its closer than Jupiter?
 
  • #11


Yes, Venus is about as big as earth, is pretty close right now, and is white. All that makes it very bright.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
5K
  • · Replies 28 ·
Replies
28
Views
5K
  • · Replies 54 ·
2
Replies
54
Views
8K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
4K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 24 ·
Replies
24
Views
4K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
4K