Re: G-11/Gemini compatibility with ASI Air
On Thu, Mar 9, 2023 at 11:03 AM, <JamesNash000@...> wrote:
Hello
Could you maybe point me in the right direction on how i would go about configuring the ASIAIR and the Gemini 2 to connect with a direct ethernet cable?
Thank you!!
Hi James, You just plug an Ethernet cable into the ASIAIR and then ug the other end into the Gemini-2. The Gemini-2 should appear as an option in the ASIAIR mount menu. Select Losmandy and it should work. You may need to set the ports and protocol in the Gemini-2 to match your Gemini-2 but I'm out of town and cannot go look at the settings.? ? -- Chip Louie Chief Daydreamer Imagination Hardware?
? ?Astropheric Weather Forecast - South Pasadena, CA?
|
When modeling by plate the HC could support other Lists within the Bright Star Selection Routine (GOTO->BRIGHT_STAR).? Adding alternate and User Lists.? Perhaps allowing user lists to clip entries by their time from the meridian.
Doug
|
>>>(yes, I know there are easier ways) ? Yes! https://www.sharpcap.co.uk/conesharp ? ? Thanks ? Brian ? Brian Valente Losmandy Astronomical ? Losmandy.com Tutorials and vids at ?
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of JH via groups.io
Sent: Tuesday, March 14, 2023 9:13 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [Gemini-II_io] Mount modeling? This makes a lot more sense. I thought I had read through the mentioned FAQs and saw the sync/align process, but I missed it was only a function of gemini.net. As a workaround I could plate solve my way to the target, then align with the HC. I initially started doing this to see if I had any cone error (yes, I know there are easier ways) and to explore the model parameters in the computer. I will try this out the next chance I get (as Paul suggests). Thanks for the clarification, all. On 3/14/23 08:42, Brian Valente wrote: Hi Jeffrey I think i see where the confusion is, and have some additional thoughts for you First as others have said, Sync does not build a model, it only rotates the model. Align is the feature to create an alignment point and refine the model. Sounds like your Gemini is working correctly. The confusion may arise from terminology: Some (typically older) controllers, "sync" was the Align function (Celestron controllers iirc).? However, all this is probably academic. If you are already plate solving, there is no need to build a model. Plate solve/center routines have pretty much eliminated the need for building a pointing model. Assuming that you have a solve/center capability in your imaging application, you do not need to build a pointing model.? ? Another question came up about mount modeling which reminded me of my
last clear night (some months ago).
I use Ekos/Kstars to control the session and it has a mount modeling
tool (image of this tool is attached). It will slew the scope to a
bright star (or some chosen criteria) and plate solve. I haven't fully
dived into this tool so I've been doing this manually the last couple
times I went out. Here's my process: find a star above my horizon (and
buildings), slew, plate solve and "move to target," which adjusts until
the target star is in the center of the frame, then syncs the mount,
then move to another star and repeat.
Now, my question is the response to the result (or lack thereof) of this
process. For the first three or so stars on the east side of the
meridian (mostly where I shoot), the pointing accuracy increases and
puts the target star closer to the center with the initial slew, but any
stars beyond that will continually be noticeably off-center, requiring
another adjustment and plate solve before it's accepted. Well, maybe my
scope is flexing, who knows. I went into the Gemini web server and
looked at the mount models; they're completely blank. No cone error, no
polar align error, no stars, nothing.
Is mount modeling only done in the Gemini hand controller? I thought
syncing on several stars would make the model. This is G2 L5. Does the
Gemini computer not use the sync command as part of its modeling routine
like the tool's description suggests?
Thanks
Jeffrey
--
--
Brian
?
|
This makes a lot more sense. I thought I had read through the
mentioned FAQs and saw the sync/align process, but I missed it was
only a function of gemini.net. As a workaround I could plate solve
my way to the target, then align with the HC. I initially started
doing this to see if I had any cone error (yes, I know there are
easier ways) and to explore the model parameters in the computer. I
will try this out the next chance I get (as Paul suggests). Thanks
for the clarification, all.
On 3/14/23 08:42, Brian Valente wrote:
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
Hi Jeffrey
I think i see where the confusion is, and have some
additional thoughts for you
First as others have said, Sync does not build a model, it
only rotates the model. Align is the feature to create an
alignment point and refine the model. Sounds like your Gemini
is working correctly.
The confusion may arise from terminology: Some (typically
older) controllers, "sync" was the Align function (Celestron
controllers iirc).?
However, all this is probably academic. If you are already
plate solving, there is no need to build a model. Plate
solve/center routines have pretty much eliminated the need for
building a pointing model. Assuming that you have a
solve/center capability in your imaging application, you do
not need to build a pointing model.?
Brian
Another
question came up about mount modeling which reminded me of my
last clear night (some months ago).
I use Ekos/Kstars to control the session and it has a mount
modeling
tool (image of this tool is attached). It will slew the scope
to a
bright star (or some chosen criteria) and plate solve. I
haven't fully
dived into this tool so I've been doing this manually the last
couple
times I went out. Here's my process: find a star above my
horizon (and
buildings), slew, plate solve and "move to target," which
adjusts until
the target star is in the center of the frame, then syncs the
mount,
then move to another star and repeat.
Now, my question is the response to the result (or lack
thereof) of this
process. For the first three or so stars on the east side of
the
meridian (mostly where I shoot), the pointing accuracy
increases and
puts the target star closer to the center with the initial
slew, but any
stars beyond that will continually be noticeably off-center,
requiring
another adjustment and plate solve before it's accepted. Well,
maybe my
scope is flexing, who knows. I went into the Gemini web server
and
looked at the mount models; they're completely blank. No cone
error, no
polar align error, no stars, nothing.
Is mount modeling only done in the Gemini hand controller? I
thought
syncing on several stars would make the model. This is G2 L5.
Does the
Gemini computer not use the sync command as part of its
modeling routine
like the tool's description suggests?
Thanks
Jeffrey
--
Brian?
Brian Valente
astro portfolio?
portfolio
astrobin?
--
Brian
|
Hi Ken,
Like Brian said, using one star on each side of the sky should be enough. As for building a horizon you could use stellarium and NINA for that. I’d try NINA first as it’s the simpler option, and then take note of the defining points and import that to stellarium, then it would be just a matter of using stellarium to goto your chosen star (which you’d know which to choose from the horizon data), centering it on your imaging camera and then hit align on your hand controller to add it to your model.
Hope this helps
Jonathan
|
It wouldn't be too hard for me to add support for horizon mapping to the ASCOM driver, but it really belongs in the Gemini itself. Maybe a new feature request for L7? ;)
Regards,
? ?-Paul
|
>>>Because my setup doesn't always get the gotos into a position where plate solving works
Makes sense, although before you go full model building, here are a few things to consider:
- have you checked your plate solver to see if you can adjust your settings for an initial solve criteria with wider search criteria?
- do you have?a blind solve failover? usually the first solve is the least accurate, and after that it generally works much more smoothly
- can you use a plate solve like PlateSolve3? Which does a better job of solving when the initial slew is less accurate (it may even have a built-in?
Barring the above, you might try with just one modeling point for east and one for west (remember sky modeling is really two models: one for each side of the sky). That should get you 80% of the way there to accurate gotos, and certainly should be enough for a plate solve to succeed. If you are visually model building, i'd pick an obvious bright star on each side, away from the poles, the meridian, and the horizon (you know, something just smack in the middle of the western sky for example), center that, and then align.?
I'm not suggesting model building is unnecessary, but it's very much less needed?in modern plate solve situations. I don't see a need to build a multi-point model to achieve what you want
Brian
On Tue, Mar 14, 2023 at 3:42?PM Oberon510 < ken@...> wrote: On Tue, Mar 14, 2023 at 03:11 PM, Brian Valente wrote:
Why do you want create a model at all if you are plate solving? Maybe I'm missing something but I don't see any added value to the added model creation steps if you can already center a target within a small # of pixels
?
Because my setup doesn't always get the gotos into a position where plate solving works - to me it is a step I have to do to get my setup to be reasonably accurate (star/objects are in the FOV) when I tell it to go somewhere.
-- Brian?
Brian Valente astro portfolio? portfolio astrobin?
--
Brian
|
On Tue, Mar 14, 2023 at 03:11 PM, Brian Valente wrote:
Why do you want create a model at all if you are plate solving? Maybe I'm missing something but I don't see any added value to the added model creation steps if you can already center a target within a small # of pixels
?
Because my setup doesn't always get the gotos into a position where plate solving works - to me it is a step I have to do to get my setup to be reasonably accurate (star/objects are in the FOV) when I tell it to go somewhere.
|
Ken
>>>>Maybe I should just do a manual model with the stars I can see each time I need to.
Why do you want create a model at all if you are plate solving? Maybe I'm missing something but I don't see any added value to the added model creation steps if you can already center a target within a small # of pixels
On Tue, Mar 14, 2023 at 2:51?PM Oberon510 < ken@...> wrote: On Mon, Mar 13, 2023 at 12:21 PM, Brian Valente wrote:
are you plate solving/syncing or are you manually building a model with alignments for use with visual, dslr, etc.?
?
I use plate solving on imaging target objects after I have created and run through a model with alignment of the stars using the automated modelling tool in the HC. At the moment I just run through the semi automatic modelling function steps and skip stars that are not visible (due to view obstructions - e.g less that 40 degrees on the W side) - I use my main camera to view and center the stars before aligning with the HC but probably could use SharpCap to plate solve and center instead if that is an option.
Maybe I should just do a manual model with the stars I can see each time I need to. I was hoping someone has a basic step by step flow that they use for building and aligning a model.
I understand now that a Horizon model is not really achievable for the semi automatic modelling function.
Thanks,
Ken
-- Brian?
Brian Valente astro portfolio? portfolio astrobin?
--
Brian
|
On Mon, Mar 13, 2023 at 12:21 PM, Brian Valente wrote:
are you plate solving/syncing or are you manually building a model with alignments for use with visual, dslr, etc.?
?
I use plate solving on imaging target objects after I have created and run through a model with alignment of the stars using the automated modelling tool in the HC. At the moment I just run through the semi automatic modelling function steps and skip stars that are not visible (due to view obstructions - e.g less that 40 degrees on the W side) - I use my main camera to view and center the stars before aligning with the HC but probably could use SharpCap to plate solve and center instead if that is an option. Maybe I should just do a manual model with the stars I can see each time I need to. I was hoping someone has a basic step by step flow that they use for building and aligning a model. I understand now that a Horizon model is not really achievable for the semi automatic modelling function. Thanks, Ken
|
On Tue, Mar 14, 2023 at 01:13 AM, JH wrote:
Another question came up about mount modeling which reminded me of my
last clear night (some months ago).
I use Ekos/Kstars to control the session and it has a mount modeling
tool (image of this tool is attached). It will slew the scope to a
bright star (or some chosen criteria) and plate solve. I haven't fully
dived into this tool so I've been doing this manually the last couple
times I went out. Here's my process: find a star above my horizon (and
buildings), slew, plate solve and "move to target," which adjusts until
the target star is in the center of the frame, then syncs the mount,
then move to another star and repeat.
Now, my question is the response to the result (or lack thereof) of this
process. For the first three or so stars on the east side of the
meridian (mostly where I shoot), the pointing accuracy increases and
puts the target star closer to the center with the initial slew, but any
stars beyond that will continually be noticeably off-center, requiring
another adjustment and plate solve before it's accepted. Well, maybe my
scope is flexing, who knows. I went into the Gemini web server and
looked at the mount models; they're completely blank. No cone error, no
polar align error, no stars, nothing.
Is mount modeling only done in the Gemini hand controller? I thought
syncing on several stars would make the model. This is G2 L5. Does the
Gemini computer not use the sync command as part of its modeling routine
like the tool's description suggests?
Thanks
Jeffrey
Gemini is born knowing where things should be in a perfect universe right out of the box. The issue is the optics are never looking where Gemini thinks Gemini is looking due to the optics and mount not being perfectly aligned with one another. In the Gemini universe building a model using the alignment function finds these differences by moving the optic to where the mount thinks it should be looking and measuring the differences a few times then adjusts the perfect Gemini universe to the not perfect combination of the Losmandy mount and the optic. But you must use the Gemini alignment / model building tool to populate the fields in the model tables.?? Once a model has been built you can use sync of you bump the mount or the model is not perfectly aligned IRL. Sync can help improve local GOTOs by centering a known object which essentially shifts the model to agree locally in the sky. If a model is done correctly and the mount has no / low flexure plate solving should not need you to sync to center an object.? If you look at the model table and the fields are all zeros you did not use the model building / alignment tool. Losmandy has a video on building models, it is older but should still be close enough for all L5 users, check it out.? ? -- Chip Louie Chief Daydreamer Imagination Hardware?
? ?Astropheric Weather Forecast - South Pasadena, CA?
|
Hi Jeffrey
I think i see where the confusion is, and have some additional thoughts for you
First as others have said, Sync does not build a model, it only rotates the model. Align is the feature to create an alignment point and refine the model. Sounds like your Gemini is working correctly.
The confusion may arise from terminology: Some (typically older) controllers, "sync" was the Align function (Celestron controllers iirc).?
However, all this is probably academic. If you are already plate solving, there is no need to build a model. Plate solve/center routines have pretty much eliminated the need for building a pointing model. Assuming that you have a solve/center capability in your imaging application, you do not need to build a pointing model.?
Brian
Another question came up about mount modeling which reminded me of my
last clear night (some months ago).
I use Ekos/Kstars to control the session and it has a mount modeling
tool (image of this tool is attached). It will slew the scope to a
bright star (or some chosen criteria) and plate solve. I haven't fully
dived into this tool so I've been doing this manually the last couple
times I went out. Here's my process: find a star above my horizon (and
buildings), slew, plate solve and "move to target," which adjusts until
the target star is in the center of the frame, then syncs the mount,
then move to another star and repeat.
Now, my question is the response to the result (or lack thereof) of this
process. For the first three or so stars on the east side of the
meridian (mostly where I shoot), the pointing accuracy increases and
puts the target star closer to the center with the initial slew, but any
stars beyond that will continually be noticeably off-center, requiring
another adjustment and plate solve before it's accepted. Well, maybe my
scope is flexing, who knows. I went into the Gemini web server and
looked at the mount models; they're completely blank. No cone error, no
polar align error, no stars, nothing.
Is mount modeling only done in the Gemini hand controller? I thought
syncing on several stars would make the model. This is G2 L5. Does the
Gemini computer not use the sync command as part of its modeling routine
like the tool's description suggests?
Thanks
Jeffrey
-- Brian?
Brian Valente astro portfolio? portfolio astrobin?
--
Brian
|
I know the OP is maybe asking for something else, but I created a horizon profile (of sorts) by taking a spherical panoramic of my site. I had an fairly easy time using a fisheye lens and Photoshop with the camera rotated on a tripod at the mount. After using the magic wand in PS to delete all the sky in the image, it gets put into Stellarium that will show the horizon. It can then be calibrated (shifted up/down and left/right and reloaded in Stellarium to become a highly reliable horizon map for planning my imaging sequences for the night.
I have to go back and find instructions online if needed.
Greg
|
As Derek pointed out, Sync simply rotates the model to match the current coordinates, it doesn't build or alter the model. To build a model, you need to do an Align on a bright star or other object or coordinates that you first do a Goto to, then center in the FOV (or plate solve then use align/additional align on the plate-solved coordinates).
If you just sync on multiple stars, all you're doing is rotating the model each time to match the current star's coordinates. The model itself is not changed.
Regards,
? ?-Paul
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
On Tue, Mar 14, 2023 at 04:13 AM, JH wrote:
Another question came up about mount modeling which reminded me of my
last clear night (some months ago).
I use Ekos/Kstars to control the session and it has a mount modeling
tool (image of this tool is attached). It will slew the scope to a
bright star (or some chosen criteria) and plate solve. I haven't fully
dived into this tool so I've been doing this manually the last couple
times I went out. Here's my process: find a star above my horizon (and
buildings), slew, plate solve and "move to target," which adjusts until
the target star is in the center of the frame, then syncs the mount,
then move to another star and repeat.
Now, my question is the response to the result (or lack thereof) of this
process. For the first three or so stars on the east side of the
meridian (mostly where I shoot), the pointing accuracy increases and
puts the target star closer to the center with the initial slew, but any
stars beyond that will continually be noticeably off-center, requiring
another adjustment and plate solve before it's accepted. Well, maybe my
scope is flexing, who knows. I went into the Gemini web server and
looked at the mount models; they're completely blank. No cone error, no
polar align error, no stars, nothing.
Is mount modeling only done in the Gemini hand controller? I thought
syncing on several stars would make the model. This is G2 L5. Does the
Gemini computer not use the sync command as part of its modeling routine
like the tool's description suggests?
Thanks
Jeffrey
|
I thought
syncing on several stars would make the model.
***
ALIGN
builds models, not SYNCH
Derek
|
To create a pointing model by plate solving, you need to have the "Sync performs additional align" option turned on in the mount.?
See:
Graeme?
Another question came up about mount modeling which reminded me of my
last clear night (some months ago).
I use Ekos/Kstars to control the session and it has a mount modeling
tool (image of this tool is attached). It will slew the scope to a
bright star (or some chosen criteria) and plate solve. I haven't fully
dived into this tool so I've been doing this manually the last couple
times I went out. Here's my process: find a star above my horizon (and
buildings), slew, plate solve and "move to target," which adjusts until
the target star is in the center of the frame, then syncs the mount,
then move to another star and repeat.
Now, my question is the response to the result (or lack thereof) of this
process. For the first three or so stars on the east side of the
meridian (mostly where I shoot), the pointing accuracy increases and
puts the target star closer to the center with the initial slew, but any
stars beyond that will continually be noticeably off-center, requiring
another adjustment and plate solve before it's accepted. Well, maybe my
scope is flexing, who knows. I went into the Gemini web server and
looked at the mount models; they're completely blank. No cone error, no
polar align error, no stars, nothing.
Is mount modeling only done in the Gemini hand controller? I thought
syncing on several stars would make the model. This is G2 L5. Does the
Gemini computer not use the sync command as part of its modeling routine
like the tool's description suggests?
Thanks
Jeffrey
|
Another question came up about mount modeling which reminded me of my last clear night (some months ago).
I use Ekos/Kstars to control the session and it has a mount modeling tool (image of this tool is attached). It will slew the scope to a bright star (or some chosen criteria) and plate solve. I haven't fully dived into this tool so I've been doing this manually the last couple times I went out. Here's my process: find a star above my horizon (and buildings), slew, plate solve and "move to target," which adjusts until the target star is in the center of the frame, then syncs the mount, then move to another star and repeat.
Now, my question is the response to the result (or lack thereof) of this process. For the first three or so stars on the east side of the meridian (mostly where I shoot), the pointing accuracy increases and puts the target star closer to the center with the initial slew, but any stars beyond that will continually be noticeably off-center, requiring another adjustment and plate solve before it's accepted. Well, maybe my scope is flexing, who knows. I went into the Gemini web server and looked at the mount models; they're completely blank. No cone error, no polar align error, no stars, nothing.
Is mount modeling only done in the Gemini hand controller? I thought syncing on several stars would make the model. This is G2 L5. Does the Gemini computer not use the sync command as part of its modeling routine like the tool's description suggests?
Thanks
Jeffrey
|
You
mean creating a Horizon profile?? That would be awesome, but as far as I know,
that can’t yet be done..
I
am blocked nearly to 40 degrees from the East to the Northwest..
Derek
|
Hi Ken
are you plate solving/syncing or are you manually building a model with alignments for use with visual, dslr, etc.?
There isn't any specific?limits for modeling that you can set, although you can choose which targets to build a model from
On Mon, Mar 13, 2023 at 11:48?AM Oberon510 < ken@...> wrote: Hi All,
I am looking for a guide for setting some modelling limits for sites with limited N,S,E,W visibility. I have one site that my Theodolite app says has visibility above 22 degrees for N,S and W but 40 degrees for W(est).
If I can't set modelling limits then does anyone have a better step by step guide for manual modelling including saving it. I have looked through the Gemini-2 web site and guides but hoping for more information from old hands.
Any guidance appreciated.
Ken
PS - Don't forget to change for DST.
-- Brian?
Brian Valente astro portfolio? portfolio astrobin?
--
Brian
|
Hi All,
I am looking for a guide for setting some modelling limits for sites with limited N,S,E,W visibility. I have one site that my Theodolite app says has visibility above 22 degrees for N,S and E but 40 degrees for W(est).
If I can't set modelling limits then does anyone have a better step by step guide for manual modelling including saving it. I have looked through the Gemini-2 web site and guides but hoping for more information from old hands.
Any guidance appreciated.
Ken
PS - Don't forget to change for DST.
|
Chip Louie
Paul Kanevsky
Greg Moxness
