Meteor observation with webcams ?

Status
Not open for further replies.
M

Mee_n_Mac

Guest
<p>It occured to me that instead of sitting outside getting eaten alive by mosquitos and trying to get lucky and capture a good trail with the dSLR, I could try another approach instead.&nbsp; Given webcams have been used to image planets and some not so deep sky objects, it seems to me that a webcam, perhaps suitably modified, might make a good meteor observer as well.&nbsp; A quick Google search shows the thought isn't original to me but there's a dearth of detailed info out there as to what's been tried and worked (or failed). I thought I might ask here and see if anyone (MW) has any thoughts on, or experiences with, using a webcam (or array of cams)&nbsp;to capture meteor trails. </p><p>&nbsp;</p><p>FWIW : I am aware of Arit's night sky / UFO catcher platform. It was probably the nucleus for my idea, sitting back there in my subconscious mind.&nbsp; Lately I've been fooling with the idea of using a pair of webcams as a passive distance & speed monitoring device but that's another topic all together. </p> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p>-----------------------------------------------------</p><p><font color="#ff0000">Ask not what your Forum Software can do do on you,</font></p><p><font color="#ff0000">Ask it to, please for the love of all that's Holy, <strong>STOP</strong> !</font></p> </div>
 
M

MeteorWayne

Guest
<p><BR/>Replying to:<BR/><DIV CLASS='Discussion_PostQuote'>It occured to me that instead of sitting outside getting eaten alive by mosquitos and trying to get lucky and capture a good trail with the dSLR, I could try another approach instead.&nbsp; Given webcams have been used to image planets and some not so deep sky objects, it seems to me that a webcam, perhaps suitably modified, might make a good meteor observer as well.&nbsp; A quick Google search shows the thought isn't original to me but there's a dearth of detailed info out there as to what's been tried and worked (or failed). I thought I might ask here and see if anyone (MW) has any thoughts on, or experiences with, using a webcam (or array of cams)&nbsp;to capture meteor trails. &nbsp;FWIW : I am away of Arit's night sky / UFO catcher platform. It was probably the nucleus for my idea, sitting back there in my subconscious mind.&nbsp; Lately I've been fooling with the idea of using a pair of webcams as a passive distance & speed monitoring device but that's another topic all together. <br />Posted by mee_n_mac</DIV></p><p>There are quite a few active meteor observing cameras out there, including one at the NJAA. Ours is an all sky camera, so only captures meteors brighter than magnitude +2.5 (the rightmost to stars of Cassiopiea). </p><p>The IMO has a video network in Europe as well:</p><p>http://www.imonet.org/#1</p><p>MnM contact me through the NJAA and give me your e-mail address there, unless you don't mind posting it here.</p><p>http://www.njaa.org/njaacontact.html&nbsp;and say the message is for Meteor Wayne, they'll know which Wayne it is for :)</p><p>I'll send you an article about our system, and we can discuss it in more detail offline. There's a lot to consider, don't think it would be of much interest to most others in the amount of detail needed.</p> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><font color="#000080"><em><font color="#000000">But the Krell forgot one thing John. Monsters. Monsters from the Id.</font></em> </font></p><p><font color="#000080">I really, really, really, really miss the "first unread post" function</font><font color="#000080"> </font></p> </div>
 
M

MeteorWayne

Guest
<p><BR/>Replying to:<BR/><DIV CLASS='Discussion_PostQuote'>There are quite a few active meteor observing cameras out there, including one at the NJAA. Ours is an all sky camera, so only captures meteors brighter than magnitude +2.5 (the rightmost to stars of Cassiopiea). The IMO has a video network in Europe as well:http://www.imonet.org/#1MnM contact me through the NJAA and give me your e-mail address there, unless you don't mind posting it here.http://www.njaa.org/njaacontact.html&nbsp;and say the message is for Meteor Wayne, they'll know which Wayne it is for :)I'll send you an article about our system, and we can discuss it in more detail offline. There's a lot to consider, don't think it would be of much interest to most others in the amount of detail needed. <br />Posted by MeteorWayne</DIV><br /><br />To expand a little, there's advantages and disadvantages. If you just want to see meteors on a TV screen, it will work. There's a tradeoff between how much of the sky you see, and how bright a meteor needs to be to be seen. Of course, if you are just looking at the TV screen, it's just like the real sky; if you look away, you miss it. There is software available (free) that will record the meteor for later analysis. Once you've set it up correctly (no trivial task, I assure you) the software will even tell you what shower it belongs to. Is it a Perseid or an alpha Capricornid, etc.</p><p>Personally, I am rarely bothered by mosquitos, and love the feeling of being out under the sky, watching it turn in front of me. Very "one with the Universe" good vibes. Plus it allows me to keep an eye out for UFO's :) (None in 1200 hours of observing time)</p><p>One of last year's&nbsp;Orionids from the NJAA Camera.</p><p>&nbsp;</p><p><br /><img src="http://sitelife.space.com/ver1.0/Content/images/store/11/1/fbb7ea95-8a3b-4217-b1b7-bebdf21d82cc.Medium.jpg" alt="" /><br /><br />http://sitelife.space.com/ver1.0/Forums/#</p> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><font color="#000080"><em><font color="#000000">But the Krell forgot one thing John. Monsters. Monsters from the Id.</font></em> </font></p><p><font color="#000080">I really, really, really, really miss the "first unread post" function</font><font color="#000080"> </font></p> </div>
 
A

aphh

Guest
<p><BR/>Replying to:<BR/><DIV CLASS='Discussion_PostQuote'>Plus it allows me to keep an eye out for UFO's :) (None in 1200 hours of observing time)One of last year's&nbsp;Orionids from the NJAA Camera.&nbsp; <br /> Posted by MeteorWayne</DIV></p><p>You need to believe in UFO's first to see one live. They don't bother to appear to non-believers... <img src="http://sitelife.space.com/ver1.0/content/scripts/tinymce/plugins/emotions/images/smiley-cool.gif" border="0" alt="Cool" title="Cool" />&nbsp; </p>
 
M

MeteorWayne

Guest
Replying to:<BR/><DIV CLASS='Discussion_PostQuote'>You need to believe in UFO's first to see one live. They don't bother to appear to non-believers... &nbsp; <br />Posted by aphh</DIV><br /><br />Exactly!!<img src="http://sitelife.space.com/ver1.0/content/scripts/tinymce/plugins/emotions/images/smiley-laughing.gif" border="0" alt="Laughing" title="Laughing" /> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><font color="#000080"><em><font color="#000000">But the Krell forgot one thing John. Monsters. Monsters from the Id.</font></em> </font></p><p><font color="#000080">I really, really, really, really miss the "first unread post" function</font><font color="#000080"> </font></p> </div>
 
M

Mee_n_Mac

Guest
<p><BR/>Replying to:<BR/><DIV CLASS='Discussion_PostQuote'>To expand a little, there's advantages and disadvantages. If you just want to see meteors on a TV screen, it will work. There's a tradeoff between how much of the sky you see, and how bright a meteor needs to be to be seen. Of course, if you are just looking at the TV screen, it's just like the real sky; if you look away, you miss it. There is software available (free) that will record the meteor for later analysis. Once you've set it up correctly (no trivial task, I assure you) the software will even tell you what shower it belongs to. Is it a Perseid or an alpha Capricornid, etc.Personally, I am rarely bothered by mosquitos, and love the feeling of being out under the sky, watching it turn in front of me. Very "one with the Universe" good vibes. Plus it allows me to keep an eye out for UFO's :) (None in 1200 hours of observing time)One of last year's&nbsp;Orionids from the NJAA Camera.&nbsp; <br />Posted by <strong>MeteorWayne</strong></DIV><br /></p><p>FOV vs resolution is one of the tradeoffs I'd be interested in.&nbsp; A wide angle cam has a high probability of capturing something but it may appear to be a small streak in a rather large sky.&nbsp; Not quite the same as you'd see with your eyes.&nbsp; A narrow FOV yeilds more detail but has less chance of capturing a meteor.&nbsp; The former might yeild good science data though not as visually pleasing as the latter.&nbsp; I'm leaning towards the latter as a goal.</p><p>How bright must a meteor be in order to be recored on a webcam ? What cams are more sensitive or lend themselves to mods to increase their ability ?&nbsp; I recall enthusiasts modifying the shutter speed to get longer exposures than possible with the stock cam.&nbsp; Perhaps a series of 10 - 30 sec exposures is preferable to the normal movie mode.</p><p>In any case it sounded like a fun geek project ... perhaps.&nbsp; </p><p>If nobody else bites on this thread I'll shoot you an e-mail and see what the NJAA has dreamed up.&nbsp; Thx.&nbsp;</p><p>ps - And speaking of bites, normally the mosquitos don't bother me much but this year we have a bumper crop !&nbsp; Small dogs have been&nbsp;drained completely dry in less time than it took to type this post.&nbsp; <img src="http://sitelife.space.com/ver1.0/content/scripts/tinymce/plugins/emotions/images/smiley-wink.gif" border="0" alt="Wink" title="Wink" /></p><p>&nbsp;</p> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p>-----------------------------------------------------</p><p><font color="#ff0000">Ask not what your Forum Software can do do on you,</font></p><p><font color="#ff0000">Ask it to, please for the love of all that's Holy, <strong>STOP</strong> !</font></p> </div>
 
T

Testing

Guest
<p><BR/>Replying to:<BR/><DIV CLASS='Discussion_PostQuote'>Exactly!! <br />Posted by MeteorWayne</DIV><br /><br />Wayne,</p><p>&nbsp;Need your opinion on an image from 07-04-08. Az 207, El 45 aprox.</p><p>118.04W 36.0N</p><p>Contact please. </p><p>&nbsp;</p> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>
 
A

aphh

Guest
<p><BR/>Replying to:<BR/><DIV CLASS='Discussion_PostQuote'>FOV vs resolution is one of the tradeoffs I'd be interested in.&nbsp; A wide angle cam has a high probability of capturing something but it may appear to be a small streak in a rather large sky.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; &nbsp; <br /> Posted by mee_n_mac</DIV></p><p>I have similar thoughts, but for a bit different reason. <br /><br />I was thinking of building a basic star tracker for testing purposes. The field of view of the camera would be divided into matrix using a software, where some of the brightest stars of the sky would be given coordinates.</p><p>Measuring the light output of the cam row by row, and comparing the result to the pre-determined star matrix plus local time would give me some attitude information about the cam.</p><p>I'd need to test cams to see how large field of view would produce enough light output from the brightest stars to give reliable results. Any two stars reliably identified would give some attitude information, atleast yaw, but perhaps pitch and roll might be doable aswell.&nbsp; &nbsp;</p>
 
M

Mee_n_Mac

Guest
<p><BR/>Replying to:<BR/><DIV CLASS='Discussion_PostQuote'>I have similar thoughts, but for a bit different reason. I was thinking of building a basic star tracker for testing purposes. The field of view of the camera would be divided into matrix using a software, where some of the brightest stars of the sky would be given coordinates.Measuring the light output of the cam row by row, and comparing the result to the pre-determined star matrix plus local time would give me some attitude information about the cam.I'd need to test cams to see how large field of view would produce enough light output from the brightest stars to give reliable results. Any two stars reliably identified would give some attitude information, atleast yaw, but perhaps pitch and roll might be doable as well.&nbsp; &nbsp; <br />Posted by <strong>aphh</strong></DIV><br /><br />Interesting ... I'm not sure of your end goal though.&nbsp; Are you trying to use the cam as&nbsp;part of a&nbsp;GOTO device, having&nbsp;the cam + software&nbsp;recognize where the telescope (I'm assuming the cam is on the&nbsp;OTA someplace) is pointed and then giving commands to the motors to go to the desired co-ordinates ?&nbsp; (Alignment, who needs to do alignment ;) ) Or is it intended to track a star and thus close a loop to eliminate drift errors (autoguider)&nbsp;?&nbsp; </p><p>In my case I'm coming more from a photographer's angle than an astronomer's.&nbsp; The only meteor "worth" catching are going to be bright so I think a relatively insensitive device like a webcam might be good enough.&nbsp; The "trick" will be to find the proper tradeoff btw FOV and resolution and setting of exposure time. My guess is that I need not re-invent the wheel but unlike using webcams as imagers, there's not a lot of info I could find on using webcams as meteor imagers (other than it's been done). </p> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p>-----------------------------------------------------</p><p><font color="#ff0000">Ask not what your Forum Software can do do on you,</font></p><p><font color="#ff0000">Ask it to, please for the love of all that's Holy, <strong>STOP</strong> !</font></p> </div>
 
M

MeteorWayne

Guest
<p><BR/>Replying to:<BR/><DIV CLASS='Discussion_PostQuote'> The only meteor "worth" catching are going to be bright so I think a relatively insensitive device like a webcam might be good enough.&nbsp; The "trick" will be to find the proper tradeoff btw FOV and resolution and setting of exposure time. My guess is that I need not re-invent the wheel but unlike using webcams as imagers, there's not a lot of info I could find on using webcams as meteor imagers (other than it's been done). <br />Posted by mee_n_mac</DIV><br /><br />That's one view of it. From a cool photo point of view, that is probably correct.</p><p>However, there's a lot of science that can be done, so please at least consider setting it up so the&nbsp; data (images collected) can be used for proper scientific analysis.</p><p>As I said, I can send you info on our system, which might at least give you one solid reference point.</p><p>Please contact me, or let me contact you.</p> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><font color="#000080"><em><font color="#000000">But the Krell forgot one thing John. Monsters. Monsters from the Id.</font></em> </font></p><p><font color="#000080">I really, really, really, really miss the "first unread post" function</font><font color="#000080"> </font></p> </div>
 
A

aphh

Guest
<p><BR/>Replying to:<BR/><DIV CLASS='Discussion_PostQuote'>Interesting ... I'm not sure of your end goal though.&nbsp; Are you trying to use the cam as&nbsp;part of a&nbsp;GOTO device, having&nbsp;the cam + software&nbsp;recognize where the telescope (I'm assuming the cam is on the&nbsp;OTA someplace) is pointed and then giving commands to the motors to go to the desired co-ordinates ?&nbsp; (Alignment, who needs to do alignment ;) ) Or is it intended to track a star and thus close a loop to eliminate drift errors (autoguider)&nbsp;?&nbsp; In my case I'm coming more from a photographer's angle than an astronomer's.&nbsp; The only meteor "worth" catching are going to be bright so I think a relatively insensitive device like a webcam might be good enough.&nbsp; The "trick" will be to find the proper tradeoff btw FOV and resolution and setting of exposure time. My guess is that I need not re-invent the wheel but unlike using webcams as imagers, there's not a lot of info I could find on using webcams as meteor imagers (other than it's been done). <br /> Posted by mee_n_mac</DIV></p><p>I'm actually most interested in providing attitude data for a spacecraft, a satellite. So this basic webcam star tracker would serve as a model of a more sophisticated methods of determining the attitude of a craft on orbit.</p><p>A spaceworthy star tracker can automatically solve full lost-in-space scenario for the craft, which I find fascinating.&nbsp;</p><p>However, this would be re-inventing the wheel, so I'm still evaluating whether a project like that is feasible.&nbsp;</p>
 
M

Mee_n_Mac

Guest
<p><BR/>Replying to:<BR/><DIV CLASS='Discussion_PostQuote'>That's one view of it. From a cool photo point of view, that is probably correct.However, there's a lot of science that can be done, so please at least consider setting it up so the&nbsp; data (images collected) can be used for proper scientific analysis. Posted by <strong>MeteorWayne</strong></DIV></p><p>Won't hurt to see what it'll cost.&nbsp; What kind of data could be collected with such a system IYO ?</p><p>Replying to:<BR/><DIV CLASS='Discussion_PostQuote'>As I said, I can send you info on our system, which might at least give you one solid reference point. Please contact me, or let me contact you. <br />Posted by <strong>MeteorWayne</strong></DIV></p><p>As the saying goes "You have mail".&nbsp;&nbsp; <img src="http://sitelife.space.com/ver1.0/content/scripts/tinymce/plugins/emotions/images/smiley-smile.gif" border="0" alt="Smile" title="Smile" /></p><p>&nbsp;</p><p>PS - Wouldn't PMs be nice for these things .... aaahhh the good old days.</p> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p>-----------------------------------------------------</p><p><font color="#ff0000">Ask not what your Forum Software can do do on you,</font></p><p><font color="#ff0000">Ask it to, please for the love of all that's Holy, <strong>STOP</strong> !</font></p> </div>
 
M

MeteorWayne

Guest
<p><BR/>Replying to:<BR/><DIV CLASS='Discussion_PostQuote'>I'm actually most interested in providing attitude data for a spacecraft, a satellite. So this basic webcam star tracker would serve as a model of a more sophisticated methods of determining the attitude of a craft on orbit.A spaceworthy star tracker can automatically solve full lost-in-space scenario for the craft, which I find fascinating.&nbsp;However, this would be re-inventing the wheel, so I'm still evaluating whether a project like that is feasible.&nbsp; <br />Posted by aphh</DIV><br /><br />Did you mean altitude? If so, a single camera cannot be used to determine that information.</p><p>It can be derived for a satellite, if you assume it's in orbit, if you measure the angular velocity, since orbital speed is related to altitude. But it would be very difficult to get accurate results.</p><p>In order to directly measure altitude, you need two cameras separated by some distance tracking the same object to use trigonometry to detrmine the height. That is in fact how the first proof of where meteors occur was made.</p> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><font color="#000080"><em><font color="#000000">But the Krell forgot one thing John. Monsters. Monsters from the Id.</font></em> </font></p><p><font color="#000080">I really, really, really, really miss the "first unread post" function</font><font color="#000080"> </font></p> </div>
 
T

Testing

Guest
<p>As the saying goes, you have mail.</p><p>Good morning.</p> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>
 
M

Mee_n_Mac

Guest
<p><BR/>Replying to:<BR/><DIV CLASS='Discussion_PostQuote'>Did you mean altitude? Posted by <strong>MeteorWayne</strong></DIV><br /><br />I think he meant attitude and not the "I'm a bad motha" kind.&nbsp; <img src="http://sitelife.space.com/ver1.0/content/scripts/tinymce/plugins/emotions/images/smiley-laughing.gif" border="0" alt="Laughing" title="Laughing" /></p><p>If you could recognize the star feild and then measure it's position and orientation wrt the imager axes&nbsp;(and thus the spacecraft) then you can get the angular position of the imager/spacecraft wrt to the galatic coordinate system of your choice. Same principle as sighting the North Star with a&nbsp;sextant to get your latitude. </p><p>At least that's what I thought he meant.&nbsp; </p> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p>-----------------------------------------------------</p><p><font color="#ff0000">Ask not what your Forum Software can do do on you,</font></p><p><font color="#ff0000">Ask it to, please for the love of all that's Holy, <strong>STOP</strong> !</font></p> </div>
 
W

Wolf873

Guest
You can use web-cams to observe Meteors? I never knew that, but I guess they have to be very expensive Web-cams. On the note of observing the meteors, what's the best way to observe them? I mean, I'm just randomly scanning the night sky for any streaks of light. Mostly I scan the sky from North-East-South, as the opposite view is blocked by the houses. Are telescopes good for observing meteors as well? <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <font size="2" color="#3366ff"><em>The most merciful thing in this world is the human mind's inability to correlate all its contents.</em></font> </div>
 
M

MeteorWayne

Guest
<p><BR/>Replying to:<BR/><DIV CLASS='Discussion_PostQuote'>You can use web-cams to observe Meteors? I never knew that, but I guess they have to be very expensive Web-cams. On the note of observing the meteors, what's the best way to observe them? I mean, I'm just randomly scanning the night sky for any streaks of light. Mostly I scan the sky from North-East-South, as the opposite view is blocked by the houses. Are telescopes good for observing meteors as well? <br />Posted by Wolf873</DIV><br /><br />North-East-South is not a bad direction at all. After midnight, the earth is heading into the east, so there are even more sporadic (kind of random) meteors, and most of the good showers come from comets that circle the sun the opposite direction from the earth and 99% of the rest of the solar system. That means they are best seen after midnight. Meanwhile, the Antihelion radiant, and a lot of summer and autumn showers come from the south (currently very near Jupiter). I look to the southeast most times in order to capture all these sources.</p><p>Telescope can be used to observe meteors, but two factors come into play.</p><p>The first is, with a scope, you can see fainter meteors. That's good.</p><p>The second is that you are looking at a VERY VERY VERY tiny piece of the sky, wheras meteors happen across the whole sky. That means you see far fewer. That's bad, if you want to see a lot of meteors. It's also not the best way to appreciate them for major showers, where the meteors occur all across the sky.</p><p>There are very dedicated people who do this for the science that can be done, led by Malcolm Currie, the IMO's Telescopic observing director. Personally, I tried it, but found it tedious and disappointing during major showers.</p><p>I admire the dedication of those few humans, probably less than a half dozen in the entire world who record scientific data that way.</p><p>There are some showers that don't produce meteors bright enough to be seen with the unaided eye, so I try and hold out the hope that some day I will be able to contribute in that field. </p><p>MW</p> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><font color="#000080"><em><font color="#000000">But the Krell forgot one thing John. Monsters. Monsters from the Id.</font></em> </font></p><p><font color="#000080">I really, really, really, really miss the "first unread post" function</font><font color="#000080"> </font></p> </div>
 
A

aphh

Guest
<p><BR/>Replying to:<BR/><DIV CLASS='Discussion_PostQuote'>I think he meant attitude and not the "I'm a bad motha" kind.&nbsp; If you could recognize the star feild and then measure it's position and orientation wrt the imager axes&nbsp;(and thus the spacecraft) then you can get the angular position of the imager/spacecraft wrt to the galatic coordinate system of your choice. Same principle as sighting the North Star with a&nbsp;sextant to get your latitude. At least that's what I thought he meant.&nbsp; <br /> Posted by mee_n_mac</DIV></p><p>That's true. The star trackers that are built into a satellite are tested on the ground first. So the webcam star tracker would be a home-made version to provide some attitude/orientation information plus a neat way to study how a machine vision works. &nbsp;</p>
 
A

aphh

Guest
<p><BR/>Replying to:<BR/><DIV CLASS='Discussion_PostQuote'>Did you mean altitude? If so, a single camera cannot be used to determine that information.It can be derived for a satellite, if you assume it's in orbit, if you measure the angular velocity, since orbital speed is related to altitude. But it would be very difficult to get accurate results.In order to directly measure altitude, you need two cameras separated by some distance tracking the same object to use trigonometry to detrmine the height. That is in fact how the first proof of where meteors occur was made. <br /> Posted by MeteorWayne</DIV></p><p>I actually meant orientation for the satellite on orbit, but what you described is interesting aswell. </p><p>I've noticed that the satellites that I observe with binoculars have different speeds. Measuring how soon the satellite travels across the field of view would give the angular velocity, right?</p><p>So if through observing I get the orbital period for the satellite and also know the angular velocity, can I now calculcate the semi-major axis or the mean distance? Perhaps this is enough data to estimate the eccentricity aswell.</p>
 
M

MeteorWayne

Guest
<p><BR/>Replying to:<BR/><DIV CLASS='Discussion_PostQuote'>I actually meant orientation for the satellite on orbit, but what you described is interesting aswell. I've noticed that the satellites that I observe with binoculars have different speeds. Measuring how soon the satellite travels across the field of view would give the angular velocity, right?So if through observing I get the orbital period for the satellite and also know the angular velocity, can I now calculcate the semi-major axis or the mean distance? Perhaps this is enough data to estimate the eccentricity aswell. <br />Posted by aphh</DIV><br /><br />I don't think it would be easy to detrmine eccentricty from observations at a single point very accurately. After all, you are only seeing a small part of the orbit.</p><p>As far as height, it can be derived with some accuracy. During my meteor sessions, I now estimate the height of the satellites I record. With practice I've gotten pretty good at it, and can easily tell the difference between a 350 km sat and one at 700 km. My next session, I'll post me estimates, and the actual orbit for those I can identify.</p> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><font color="#000080"><em><font color="#000000">But the Krell forgot one thing John. Monsters. Monsters from the Id.</font></em> </font></p><p><font color="#000080">I really, really, really, really miss the "first unread post" function</font><font color="#000080"> </font></p> </div>
 
M

Mee_n_Mac

Guest
<p>So in continuing to muse over the problem I see it as divided into 2 camps; use a whole sky approach and image a wide FOV so as to have a high probabilty of capture (though at low resolution) or stare&nbsp;though a narrow FOV and mebbe get a high res capture.&nbsp; I considered scanning a narrow FOV across the "whole" sky but that's not really any better. Then it occured to me that what's needed is, perhaps, both approaches.&nbsp; Use a wide FOV to detect a meteor at the beginning of it's run, get&nbsp; rough idea of where it is and then steer the narrow FOV to it.&nbsp; I figured that while a bit more complicated than I had wanted this might work. The problem (other than $$) then is ... do meteors "last" long enough to steer the imager to them.&nbsp;Some certainly don't but others .... &nbsp;I wasn't sure about the concept (let alone the execution) but then I ran across this site where it had been done. (Like most good ideas, it's already been thought of previously ... /sigh)</p><p>So it appears that for some cases such an approach might yeild the desired results.&nbsp; I can't, nor want to, duplicate the equipment used above (for one, I don't want to truly track the meteor as they did) but something like it might be doable even on my budget.&nbsp; I'm going to think about it some more.&nbsp; Comments anyone ?</p><p>Another site with some data from the AIM-IT.</p> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p>-----------------------------------------------------</p><p><font color="#ff0000">Ask not what your Forum Software can do do on you,</font></p><p><font color="#ff0000">Ask it to, please for the love of all that's Holy, <strong>STOP</strong> !</font></p> </div>
 
M

MeteorWayne

Guest
<p><BR/>Replying to:<BR/><DIV CLASS='Discussion_PostQuote'>So in continuing to muse over the problem I see it as divided into 2 camps; use a whole sky approach and image a wide FOV so as to have a high probabilty of capture (though at low resolution) or stare&nbsp;though a narrow FOV and mebbe get a high res capture.&nbsp; I considered scanning a narrow FOV across the "whole" sky but that's not really any better. Then it occured to me that what's needed is, perhaps, both approaches.&nbsp; Use a wide FOV to detect a meteor at the beginning of it's run, get&nbsp; rough idea of where it is and then steer the narrow FOV to it.&nbsp; I figured that while a bit more complicated than I had wanted this might work. The problem (other than $$) then is ... do meteors "last" long enough to steer the imager to them.&nbsp;Some certainly don't but others .... &nbsp;I wasn't sure about the concept (let alone the execution) but then I ran across this site where it had been done. (Like most good ideas, it's already been thought of previously ... /sigh)So it appears that for some cases such an approach might yeild the desired results.&nbsp; I can't, nor want to, duplicate the equipment used above (for one, I don't want to truly track the meteor as they did) but something like it might be doable even on my budget.&nbsp; I'm going to think about it some more.&nbsp; Comments anyone ?Another site with some data from the AIM-IT. <br />Posted by Mee_n_Mac</DIV><br /><br />Sorry for the delay in the reply. I had to finish writing a time dependant article.</p><p>You are right, it's a tradeoff. Except I suspect only real kickass systems would be able to slew fast enough to get to the close up FOV. Almost all meteors last less than a second (for example Perseids travel 59 km/ sec, the depth of the meator luminance layer is ~ 40 km). If the metor hits the atmosphere at a glancing angle, it will last a few seconds, but they are rare, and it's still hard to imagine a scope having time to detect it, slew, and track.</p><p>I have not&nbsp;looked at&nbsp;the link you put up, now that I am finished writing, I will check it out.</p> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><font color="#000080"><em><font color="#000000">But the Krell forgot one thing John. Monsters. Monsters from the Id.</font></em> </font></p><p><font color="#000080">I really, really, really, really miss the "first unread post" function</font><font color="#000080"> </font></p> </div>
 
J

junvic

Guest
<p>if its true that i can see meteor showers through my webcam its more compatible that i'll be able to see it effortless, but its not the way it is it shoukd be seen through my own naked eyes....though effortless to do this i will just stay in my place so i can be able to see it personally so its not really that&nbsp; hard to wait for the meteor shower occurs i'll just wait and see it to myself...</p><p>&nbsp;</p>
 
T

Testing

Guest
<p><BR/>Replying to:<BR/><DIV CLASS='Discussion_PostQuote'>if its true that i can see meteor showers through my webcam its more compatible that i'll be able to see it effortless, but its not the way it is it shoukd be seen through my own naked eyes....though effortless to do this i will just stay in my place so i can be able to see it personally so its not really that&nbsp; hard to wait for the meteor shower occurs i'll just wait and see it to myself...&nbsp; <br />Posted by junvic</DIV></p><p>I don't have much experience with webcam's but recently caught a meteor in an SLR time exposure that I did not catch naked eye, and did not see on the PC screen until I turned out the lights in the room during review. Been going out each evening taking random direction 15 second exposures to try to catch another. Time to head to the high country for some more star therapy.</p> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>
 
M

MeteorWayne

Guest
<p><BR/>Replying to:<BR/><DIV CLASS='Discussion_PostQuote'>I don't have much experience with webcam's but recently caught a meteor in an SLR time exposure that I did not catch naked eye, and did not see on the PC screen until I turned out the lights in the room during review. Been going out each evening taking random direction 15 second exposures to try to catch another. Time to head to the high country for some more star therapy. <br />Posted by Testing</DIV><br /><br />If you want to try and capture meteors, longer exposures would be better, depending on how long the skyglow takes to overcome things. I'd suggest trying a few longer exposures up to 10 or 15 minutes and seeing what looks best. On one hand, the stars will be slightly smeared, but you will capture star colors better, and have much better odds of caoturing a meteor. Even on the peak Perseid night, a few minutes of exposure would vastly increase your odds.</p><p>If you wish, I can suggest a field to aim for on that night.</p> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><font color="#000080"><em><font color="#000000">But the Krell forgot one thing John. Monsters. Monsters from the Id.</font></em> </font></p><p><font color="#000080">I really, really, really, really miss the "first unread post" function</font><font color="#000080"> </font></p> </div>
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

ASK THE COMMUNITY