开云体育

Hi Jamie, By "worse", what do mean? 1. Autoguiding appeared worse with PEC enabled? 2. Or the measured periodic error with PEC enabled was greater than disabled? 3. Something else? -Ray

I followed the recommended PemPro PEC programming method, and so far have found it to make things worse. I'm assuming that it's operator error, me being the operator. I expect that it will improve

Hi Arun yes, you and I are on the same page. Having done a lot of PHD support over the years, there are many people who only relate to what they see in PHD graphs and statistics, without knowing how

Hi Brian, I was referring to the main image scale, not the guiding image scale. Yes, that is why I pay attention to the arc second number in PHD2, since it the more meaningful number in translating

whether one is greater than the other would not matter; you'd get round stars because your pixels would be too large to resolve the difference. yes i generally agree, but i often see things at or

Hi Aubrey Aurun pretty much nailed the answer. the relationship depends on the image scale from your guiding setup and the image scale on your imaging setup if you can supply this info i can give

Very good Arun, I have never heard that before. So if you move from an STT 8300 with the Kodak Chip 5.6 Pixels to a Starlight Express 814 with 3.6 pixels, on an 2000 mm f/9 scope what effect would you

RMS stands for Root Mean Square. It is a measure of, on average, how large the deviations are from the baseline. An RMS value of zero means a perfectly flat graph. In the context of autoguiding, we

Hi I am interested in this discussion. Can someone explain the statements that the closer RA and Dec are in RMS the more round the star. What is the underlying explanation. Thanks. Aubrey Sent from

"Eccentricity (star roundness) really depends on how close RA and DEC RMS are, not necessarily how high is your RMS low RMS = small stars RA and DEC RMS close in value = round stars" True - but I'd

As others have suggested, take the guide camera out of the guider (but first use a parafocal ring on it so you don't loose focus)? and insert an eyepiece. Place a bright obvious star in the center of

course of a night on one target, the guide scope will stay on a star, but your image frames will start to travel around it in a small circle. you won't get cone error from misalignment of your

If you want to line both scopes up, point your main scope at a bright star and center it up in your camera. Take the auto guider camera out of your guide scope and stick an eyepiece in the guide

Guys, After a night of reflection I realized that since the orientation of my oval stars was not coincident with RA or DEC, it is likely it was not caused by a guiding issue. So this morning I had a

I was out again tonight and I've come to the conclusion that multistar is a big improvement to guiding. I was getting solid sustained 0.6 rms range of guiding tonight. Previously I was getting around

OK, I have uploaded the log from this session. https://openphdguiding.org/logs/dl/PHD2_logs_xDGZ.zip You should see a couple short guiding runs as I played around with it before starting an imaging

Tony, Like everyone has said, the imaging and guide scopes do not have to be perfectly aligned, but they should be pretty close. I use the crosshairs in both PHD2 and Sequence Generator to get as

Its bedtime for Bonzo here.... I'll upload tomorrow and see what you can see. Paul -- Paul Goelz Rochester Hills, MI USA pgoelz@... www.pgoelz.com

Any of the things you mentioned could contribute to that. a bad PEC could certainly create havoc too best way is to upload your guidelogs and we can do some analysis -- Brian Brian

I should also add that although seeing seemed OK, transparency was awful due to high humidity and (I think) thin high cirrus. Bands of high cirrus passing through could have I guess caused