STS-134: videos of Endeavour and ISS, plus solar transits

From: j.allport@utoronto.ca
Date: Sun Jun 05 2011 - 15:48:54 UTC

  • Next message: Marco Langbroek: "SATOBS ML (4353), 3 June 2011 (Pt. II): IGS 1B, Nanosail UNID-X"

    > ------------------------------------
    > From: Thierry Legault <legault@club-internet.fr>
    > Date: Sun, Jun 5, 2011 at 4:40 AM
    > Subject: STS-134: videos of Endeavour and ISS, plus solar transits
    > To: SeeSat-L@satobs.org
    >
    >
    > hello,
    >
    > as usual I have travelled in western Europe to catch Endeavour during
    > STS-134, fighting with bad weather and average seeing. Here is the
    > compilation of the results:
    >
    > http://legault.perso.sfr.fr/STS-134.html
    >
    > You'll find a 3D video of a pass of Endeavour docked to the ISS
    > (stereo pair and anaglyph), another video with two passes of
    > Endeavour before return to Earth (unfortunately the seeing was bad)
    > and several solar transits.
    >
    > The videos have been taken with a 10" ACF Meade telescope on a
    > Takahashi EM-400 German mount heavily (hardware and software)
    > modified for real-time fast tracking with a guide camera on a finder.
    > The main camera is a Lumenera Skynyx L2-2 recording monochrome 12-bit
    > Fits files at 10 fps (one frame is 4 Mb and there are more than 1000
    > frames for a pass). As usual in planetary imaging, each frame of the
    > final video is a combination of 15 to 30 consecutive registered raw
    > frames (in order to smooth turbulence and to improve signal-to-noise
    > ratio), followed by slight sharpening.
    >
    > During this vacancy period I have also taken other satellites, it
    > will take some time for processing and preparation of pages but soon
    > you'll see videos of passes of USA-186 (Keyhole), X-37B (OTV-2) and
    > Nanosail. Stay tuned...  :-)
    >
    > regards
    >
    >
    >
    > Thierry Legault
    > www.astrophoto.fr
    >
    
    First, let me say that I find the data liked above absolutely  
    outstanding. We are all better off for being able to share in Thierry  
    and Emmanuel's results.
    
    Unfortunately, I can't be certain, but I think this report does not  
    conform to the SeeSat list rules concerning high-resolution imaging.
    
    1. It's not clear to me the intent of rule 1. Is the observer required  
    to provide all available existing desginations from the 3 listed, or  
    only one of the listed? I believe only the common name is provided.  
    It's possible this is sufficient.
    
    3. I was not able to find the observing location in the email above,  
    or on the linked site. I propose that "Pau, France", or "Spain" is not  
    of sufficient precision for me to evaluate the supplied data.
    
    4. Date and time have been provided to the nearest minute. A factor of  
    60 too coarse to enable reasonable analysis of the data per SeeSat  
    rules. Other observations on the same page have been provided to the  
    nearest day. A factor of > 80000 too coarse. Further, even if the time  
    to the nearest second were provided for the video, there are many  
    still-frames shown from the video. It is not clear to me at what point  
    in the video these were taken, compounded by the fact that the video  
    itself has been accelerated. By my estimation, none of the presented  
    data is in accord with this rule.
    
    9. The data provided are deficient in several aspects: Total duration  
    is provided for the solar transit images, but not for the pass videos.  
    Exposure per frame is not provided for the video (though thankfully it  
    is provided for the DSLR-taken transit images. Resolution and bit  
    depth for the raw data are not provided.
    
    10. Processing is described in a cursory manner on the linked  
    equipment page (stacking in groups of 10, wavelet sharpened, and low  
    level adjustment). It's not clear exactly what settings are used for  
    such processing, nor is it clear whether there has been any culling  
    from the raw data prior to stacking.
    
    11. Raw data is not provided, nor is it offered as available on request.
    
    As such it is clear this post does not adequately address the list  
    rules. I leave it as an exercise for the reader to decide if it's the  
    posted data or the rules themselves that are inappropriate for the list.
    
    Regards,
    Justin
    
    _______________________________________________
    Seesat-l mailing list
    http://mailman.satobs.org/mailman/listinfo/seesat-l
    



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sun Jun 05 2011 - 15:49:17 UTC