Jump to content

Canada's top-tier Telescopes & Accessories

Carlesa25

Members
  • Content Count

    17
  • Joined

  • Days Won

    2

Carlesa25 last won the day on May 8

Carlesa25 had the most liked content!

About Carlesa25

  • Rank
    Red Giant

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    Spain
  1. Hello: I have proceeded to uninstall the program clean all possible remains and config. then I have reinstalled the program (the latest version) and the first impression is that there has been an improvement, there is no longer any CPU affinity assignment, we will see if it has been the solution, I will report. Regards.
  2. Thanks for the prompt response. When a photo is downloaded, it is blocked, the entire previous process of taking, focusing etc ... has worked perfectly. It is not fixed ... sometimes it is the first photo and in others at the end of a sequence of 6 shots for example. I do not have any affinity assignment system predefined for BackyarEos or for any other process. I have simply seen that BackYarEOS and OTelescope.BackgroundWorker.Start.exe always start with the allocation of a single processor and it is not usually normal in the operation of a program. But I have changed the assignment to all CPUs and the hang problem during USB download persists. As you suggest, I will reinstall the previous version and see if the problem persists or is fixed.
  3. Hi, thank you for you answer. What I can tell you is that all this problem with the previous version did not exist, I have worked for a long time with two canon cameras without any problem. If it worked before and now it doesn't and the rest of the equipment, hardware, software etc ... is the same, the cause I think is in the new version of BackYardEOS. I have never had a problem with USB traffic using a USB3 powered hub. Regards.
  4. Rfa: BackYardEOS 3.2 + Windows10 Pro + INTEL i7 Processor + 8 Gb RAM. Processor affinity assignment. When executing the program especially during the download of the photo by USB it crashes, if it is not in the first photo in one of the immediately following ones. The problem is aggravated if BackYardEos-Camera 2 is running simultaneously. Working with two Canon EOS cameras. Description: Processor tuning is always assigned to CPU 0 (only one CPU out of 7 available) for both the "BackYardEOS 3.2-Camera 1" process and "OTelescope.BackgroundWorker.Start.exe" and BackYardEOS3.2-Camera 2 and the OTelescope.BackgroundWorker.Start process (Camera 1 and Camera2) are also assigned to the same CPU 0. If I manually proceed to modify the processor assignment and change it to "No Affinity" (all CPUs available) BakYardEOS 3.2 works perfectly for both cameras. Unfortunately this situation does not always repeat itself, on many occasions BackYardEOS 3.2 starts without affinity, that is to say all available CPUs without problem, on the contrary, the process "OTelescope.BackgroundWorker.Start.exe" always runs assigned to CPU 0.
  5. Hello, I have installed the new version without problem, I have not yet been able to test it extensively. May I insist on my request, which I think is reasonable. The possibility of using different ISOs in the master and slave cameras is justified in parallel camera setups but with different optics, which is necessary to set different ISOs (same exposure time, number of shots etc ... the rest of parameters remain identical) for a different focal ratio and final brightness of the set. Regards,
  6. I have installed in the same Skywatcher AZ-EQ5 PRO mount a 6 "f / 9 RC GSO telescope and a 90mm f / 5 Refractor in parallel. Each has a different Canon camera mounted (550D and 1100D both refrigerated) that shoot at the same time and cover different amplitude fields (different focal lengths). Obviously on both cameras, execute the same number of shots, during the same time and at the same time. Having them synchronized interests me to facilitate the operation and execute the Dithering. The option of using two different ISOS is necessary to be able to adjust the sensitivity of the camera to the field they cover (since the exposure time must necessarily be the same) you cannot use the same parameters with two different telescopes, with diameters and focal lengths different ... I don't know if I explain. Attached link to a view of my installation. MY TEAM - Deep Space
  7. When shooting with two cameras at the same time, they are mounted on two different telescopes (usually). It is normal that the acquisition plan is the same in the two Master / Slave cameras but the option to change the ISO (in the slave camera) is important and desirable since, for example; the performance of a GSO RC 6 " f/ 9 and a Refractor 90mm f / 5 is very different and the way to optimize light shots is to play with the ISO of this second camera. Currently I solve this issue (somewhat handmade) by starting the two cameras independently, the same number of shots and times but different ISO and launched the shots of the two cameras at the same time; the result is good, two simultaneous sets of lights, Wide Field and Narrow Field but with compensated lighting. I sincerely recommend that you study the proposed option of being able to select a different ISO in Master-Slave. Regards.
  8. Hi, thank you for you answer. I think it would be an option to consider since normally when two cameras are mounted it is in different equipment and with different characteristics. It is normal that the acquisition plan is the same in the two Master / Slave cameras but the option to change the ISO (in the slave camera) is important since the response of a GSO RC 6 "and a Refractor 90mm f / 5 is very different and the way to optimize the shot is to play with the ISO of this second camera. Currently I solve this issue (somewhat handmade) by starting the two cameras independently, the same number of shots and times but different ISO and launched the shots of the two cameras at the same time; the result is good, two simultaneous sets of lights, Wide Field and Narrow Field but with compensated lighting. I sincerely recommend that you study the proposed option of a different ISO in Master-Slave. Regards.
  9. Hello: I have two telescopes mounted in parallel with a Canon in each one, I use the Dual Camera option and it works perfectly but I would be interested in being able to change the ISO in the second camera, that is to say the same acquisition plan but with two different Isos, from At the moment I have not managed to get it to work, is this option possible?
  10. Carlesa25

    TWO CAMERAS

    Hello: Thank you, I understand that I will take it into account.
  11. Carlesa25

    TWO CAMERAS

    Hi: Thank you, I'm glad to know that; If in general this will be the case, the two cameras will work synchronized on the same field, with the same number of shots and exposure time.
  12. Carlesa25

    TWO CAMERAS

    Hi. Thanks for the answers. As I say the assembly is a single mount AZ-EQ5 GT supporting a RC 6 "+ Refractor 90mm f / 5.5 and two Canon cameras working at the same time, one in narrow field and the other in wide field. What I see most complicated is the control of Dither with PHD2 in a single mount.
  13. Carlesa25

    TWO CAMERAS

    Hi: I intend to mount a second Canon camera in my configuration, there are two telescopes in parallel, a 6 "RC (narrow field) and a Refractor 90mm f / 5.5. (Wide field) My question is: I can control the motorized focus of the two telescopes (different models) well. The exposure times, which may be (or not) different for each camera, as well as the Dither in the mount with PHD2. will there be conflicts? Thank you.
  14. Hello: The problem is solved and good for BackyardEOS. It is a fault of my camera that lets in some parasitic light and that I have the viewer well covered, problem in long exposures. I have made the tests in my workshop with a normal general illumination> low, not in a real situation of a dark environment. The reason why with BackyardEOS I detected this problem when comparing with EosUtility because for a lamentable accumulation of circumstances, the position of the camera was not the same in the two situations, in one had more external light than in the other ... result parasitic lights in one case and not the other ... I have learned something. I put on the track of the problem that when repeating the tests the parasitic lighting was not the same if performed with daylight or with artificial lighting, result, repeating the tests in a controlled and dark environment there are no parasitic illuminations even with 300 seconds of exposure to 1600 ISO. In short, BackyarEOS works perfectly for me (I'll buy a license), even activating the mirroring virtual system that works perfectly, which allows me to mark and use the Mirror Lock (I have it 3 seconds late). Thanks for your attention. Greetings.
  15. Hello: This second sample is taken with the same conditions 180 seconds ISO 800 by EosUtility and the problem of lighting does not appear.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

This site uses cookies to offer your a better browsing experience. You can adjust your cookie settings. By closing this banner, scrolling this page, clicking a link or continuing to browse otherwise, you agree to the use of cookies, our Privacy Policy, and our Terms of Use