|
Post by Dragon Man on Jan 29, 2016 15:04:34 GMT
This blew me away, and it's at only 1/4 of a second framerate! Imagine how much more would show up at 1/2 a second framerate which is still unbelievably fast :
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 29, 2016 18:57:39 GMT
Wait till you see 4K. Hang on to your hat, socks, shorts, shoes and visa card.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 29, 2016 23:32:34 GMT
When is 4k coming out? Where did you see it?
|
|
|
Post by Dragon Man on Jan 30, 2016 9:21:13 GMT
Wait till you see 4K. Hang on to your hat, socks, shorts, shoes and visa card. Yep, 4k is nice, but it doesn't broadcast. No matter how high a resolution a camera can get, the Broadcast websites still only broadcast to a certain level. Beyond that it doesn't show any greater resolution than the next broadcaster.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 30, 2016 20:07:15 GMT
Did you know you could view without broadcasting? I have done it a few times. 4K is out. It is also refereed to as Ultra High Definition or something like that. Samsung claims to have sold 2 million last year. Like all new toys it comes with a price but that should start coming down soon.
|
|
|
Post by davy on Jan 30, 2016 21:59:24 GMT
I don't think it will be long before prices start dropping,i see that a lot of the drone makers are pushing 4k video so hopefully it will be something we could dabble with. the a7 is a nice camera and gets pretty good reviews in cloudy nights by users.
|
|
|
Post by ChrisV on Jan 31, 2016 3:01:06 GMT
That's pretty amazing. It must be one sensitive sensor
|
|
|
Post by Dragon Man on Jan 31, 2016 10:16:15 GMT
Did you know you could view without broadcasting? I have done it a few times. LOL! Yes, I have done it too. But I prefer it if it were possible to share a 4k view with the world 'Live' not keep it to myself. As yet we can't.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 31, 2016 21:04:31 GMT
I have considered doing a few broadcasts but there's no doubt I would the first broadcaster banned for a politically incorrect response to the behavior of a certain group that seem to think the broadcasts are a social event put on just for them.
There really is no way to describe 4K other than to look at a 1024 x 768 image from a normal distance then put you nose up to the screen. That just gives an idea of the difference in the resolution but you have to see 4K to appreciate it. Think along the lines of looking at a perfectly framed and composed photo of an XKE Jag or just a photo of it's fender.
|
|
|
Post by davy on Jan 31, 2016 21:13:27 GMT
That would depend on where and what you broadcast ldb.. so do you think the 4k will filter through for astronomy use before the next camera manufacturer brings out another game changer.what would be the best..sensibly priced camera..be your ideal one and what improvement would you wish to do to it..to make it perfect..
Can you help micheal in any way with his problem,I know you have a fantastic set up obs..Davy
|
|
|
Post by howie1 on Jan 31, 2016 23:07:02 GMT
Dunno about 4k ... but I do know the A7S is nearly 3k ... as in body only for nearly $3,000 AUD. LOL!! On serious note there's a few doing astrophotography and I have seen a few broadcasts with the A7S. Don't recall who I saw. They were testing cranking it up to something around ISO 125,000 and doing 2 sec shots. AstroToaster couldn't keep up with the processing of such large RAW files in such a rapid fashion and crashed out. But up to that point the images certainly had some grain but overall for seconds of image per frame were surprisingly good. Does amazing low light video ... www.eoshd.com/2014/07/astounding-sony-a7s-low-light-test-philip-bloom/
|
|
|
Post by Rick in NWArk on Feb 1, 2016 3:55:27 GMT
Netflix has some 4K content so no reason Astronomy Broadcasts can't be 4K if the camera, broadcaster's uplink speed, website, and users download speed have enough oomph.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 1, 2016 6:56:57 GMT
That would depend on where and what you broadcast ldb.. so do you think the 4k will filter through for astronomy use before the next camera manufacturer brings out another game changer.what would be the best..sensibly priced camera..be your ideal one and what improvement would you wish to do to it..to make it perfect.. Can you help micheal in any way with his problem,I know you have a fantastic set up obs..Davy The Mallincam Universe at full Resolution is a bit under 4K. An image fits nicely on the screen but doesn't fill it completely. I believe the A7s has a simpler resolution. A search turned up a page with what appeared to be several A7 camera models with a wide range of resolution. It's not a matter of filtering down, 4K is here already but few are interested. We are dominated by the Closed Circuit Television Camera (CCTV). They have been around for quite some time now and do the job they need to do so well there is not a lot of incentive to change them. They are increasing their resolution to HD but it doesn't seem to have caught on yet. Face it there are millions of these cameras in use. They last for years and in many cases replacing these cameras with higher resolution will involve changing all the recording and viewing equipment. What this means to us is the 700 x whatever sized CCD will be around for a long time. It will be cheap, fast and will dominate the entry and intermediate level for some time. 4K is for those of us wanting a better view and are willing to pay the prices. Much more expensive equipment and much more time waiting for exposures. 4K will eventually come down in price and take over the consumer market but I doubt it will take over the astro market for a long time. Astro 4K will be expensive simply because of the limited market. It will be slower because if the pixel size of the size of the detector. More will be attracted to 4K but they will be a small minority. As for sensibly priced, that depends on the user. A thousand dollars is sensible if you want one and that is what they cost. Look at what you will pay for a top end Astro Photo Camera. Then factor in a mount that is suitable. Improvements will mainly be in the software side. MiloSlick is just the beginning. I'm doing what MiloSlick does and more. What we have to do is convince the people that hand out free display software to stop doing it. When the users have to pay they will get something for it. Think how much better MiloSlick could be if it's owner was getting a few hundred grand a year to improve it. Every time I see someone recommend free software I always cringe. Try commercial software you cheap xxxx. You don't have a clue what you are missing and you are teaching everybody to be the same. Perfect will be a Hubble in my back yard. Until then it will be a matter of making the best out of what is available. That A7 looks like a beauty. Does the software that comes with it equal the Universe Software? Hardware and software are mutually important. We have to have the live view whether it is video or a series of still images. We don't have to have the processing but it adds a whole new dimension to the viewing. I wouldn't be without it. Refresh my memory. Who is Micheal and what is his problem?
|
|
|
Post by davy on Feb 1, 2016 7:26:23 GMT
My view on affordable camera is one that sits about doing nothing,I bought the qhy5ii colour and a couple of canon 600d ,,because of the weather I cant get out so was no point me getting a thousand pound astronomy camera..I still get use from my dslr.
Micheal morris he posted looking for advice on automating cameras through a software interface
|
|
|
Post by Rick in NWArk on Feb 1, 2016 18:08:21 GMT
HDMI is an interface standard that supports transfer of digital video and audio. The video is uncompressed and the audio has an option of being compressed. The different video formats that are supported become a resolution x a frequency. Many different resolutions are supported - some in a 4:3 aspect ratio, some in 16:9, and as well as other ratios.
There is no technical reason why a camera with a resolution like the Universe couldn't have an HDMI output. Use an HDMI cable to an HDMI monitor and boom!
That said, if you think about laptops/PCs, you don't usually have an HDMI input port. The HDMI port is output only. Also long HDMI cords are costly etc. So you have vendors not pushing HDMI for camera outputs and using other interfaces like USB. One interesting possibility is ethernet to send video over.
The rubber meets the road when you get to the display device. Just because HDMI delivers a 16:9 ratio resolution of 1920x1080p @ 100 Hz does not mean that your monitor will display that without some hoops to jump through that can cause some distortion of the image.
In seeing a lot of DSLRs recently on NSN, its exciting to see the possibilities of these big-chip players. There have been a lot of encouragement by people like Chris Appelton and other hardcore video-only individuals who are pushing these "live imaging" applications that are producing some great results.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 1, 2016 20:22:05 GMT
Rick, The Universe is a CCD camera with a USB interface. It displays single images and needs a computer. HDMI is video. Notwithstanding the technical issues the Universe can be operated in full resolution which is slightly under 4K, 2, 3,nd 4x bin. 2x is very close to HDMI and displays well at that resolution. 4x is comparable in resolution and sensitivity to an Xtreme. Binning combines adjacent pixels. Decreases resolution but increases sensitivity. Sort of gives the user the best of both worlds. I get a kick out of the term hardcore video-only individuals. When you run into one ask him what is the differences to a viewer between an integrated video image and a continual series of still images from a CCD camera. The answer is there is no difference. Anyone trying to blubber out some technical tripe does not have a clue. Born, raised and educated in Cloudy Naughts. There is something I forgot to mention in my previous post to answer the question "What improvement would you wish to do to it..to make it perfect?" We are all familiar with stacking. I think it is possible to extent stacking capabilities. Cameras could be made to auto field rotate an image in memory. This would give Alt-Az mounts the same capability of a polar mount. Any tracking mount will be suitable for long exposures. Along with Auto Field Rotation the camera could also compensate for poor tracking in memory. No need to shift the telescope, just shift the data in memory. Seems to me cameras could be made to recognize the difference between background noise and real data. It may require the camera having the ability to learn as there are so many different conditions but a user could define an area and say this is noise get rid of it, this is good data save it. Stacking does that now when you are averaging the data in subs. Let the camera sum a few subs then teach it what is noise and what is not. Put those capabilities into cameras like the Universe or A7 add a pinch of MilloSlick or MaximDL for flavor and display the image in Ultra High Definition. That will be eye candy. eye candy. The floodgates are leaking badly now. Wouldn't take much to break them down completely. I went back and reread Micheal's post. This is what he asked "My programming skills are non-existent. I know it's a long shot, but are there any programmers out there who could write a simple programme to do this?" Turns out that shot wasn't quite as long as he thought. He shot himself in the foot. This is not a nice response but you asked for it. Thin Skins best leave now. Programmers are not born knowing how to program, they all had to learn. He didn't ask for help so he could solve his problem himself, he asked for a Magic Wand. It is becoming a very common affliction on the internet. I've mentioned an App called AutoHotKey many times that probably would let Micheal and many others accomplish small tasks like the one he wants. I doubt anyone has even gone to the site and looked at it. Too much trouble? Too bad. Google AutoHotKey, download the App, spend a few hours or days if necessary and get a feel for how it works. If you have any questions I'll gladly point you in the direction where you will find the answer. LdB No apology. You said earlier that you liked my site. It is what it is because I made it what it is. I didn't run out and ask someone else to solve my problems. I did what I needed to do to solve them myself. Not a nice attitude perhaps but the more I learned the easier it was to do things.
|
|
|
Post by davy on Feb 1, 2016 21:25:49 GMT
Dear o dear ,did we ask for that,,probably not,you mentioned born n bred on cloudy nights,yip I can believe that,this being a nice friendly forum and folk come and ask questions because they have hit a stumbling point,if this isnt for you ..look out the door dosent hit you on the ass on the way out.. we play nice here..
|
|
|
Post by Rick in NWArk on Feb 1, 2016 22:50:28 GMT
I am fully aware of what the Universe is, thank you. I was just trying to point out that since HDMI is DIGITAL video, made of a resolution x a certain frame rate refresh that it *could* be used for a camera with a large chip like the Universe to give an HDMI output, if the vendor decided to design it that way. Technologically, nothing preventing that.
My point in Michael's post was that if the device does not have an API (interface), the best programmer in the world has no place to send commands to control it.
|
|