(meteorobs) OT -Question to the UFOCaptureV2. -PAUL PUGH et.al.,

Mon Aug 24 01:56:08 EDT 2009

It is getting very interesting now.

My settings are probably radical and I will list them shortly after I 
mention that the worst computer running UFO is 800mhz & 384mb memory. It is 
still really flakey but does detect weak meteors even tho' it does not 
produce .avi's good or long enough to see all the full flight path. Same on 
airplanes, jerky .avi motions. Settings are the the same as on a faster 
computer running UFO also. I plan on changing motherboards to 900mhz & 512mb 
ram if it will fit the case on the slower one to see if that is the problem 
with it.

Meanwhile.... the bigger computer running UFO is 2392mhz with 2.048Gb ram. 
It has been capturing short and fast meteors and tonight captured a 13 
second aircraft and played it back perfectly as an .avi. (I am experimenting 
on the Frame Shift Diff. number). It was at 5 when the plane was recorded 
and I am reducing it to 3 to see if bright planes drop out too soon. Long 
Plane flights are a good way of making sure UFO is working.

Anyway to the settings.....

Checking Detect level Noise & Scintillation Mask killed me. Even after 
reducing their effects with numerical adjustments. I used MaskW (with the 
Scintillation checked) to see how much reduction to try. It got better. As 
it turns out, not using Scintillation Mask (at all) was best for me. Detect 
Level Noise also is not good because it is self adjusting and can make weak 
meteors disappear altogether by ramping up the Detect Level.

One of the key adjustments is to make Detect Size....really small! I use 3 
even with the detect level bouncing around 50. A small meteor will go easily 
over these two adjustments and cause a trigger.

Nothing else is checked except Superimpose date/time on the Input Tab.

On the Operation Tab... leave everything alone on Still Image Capture box. 
Check the start-stop box and set the hours.

I do not check any other box and leave everything else I would not use there 
alone....the way it was. Then I save my settings.

So for now..... I am trying to decide on what the Frame Shift Diff. number 
should be by observing its effect on both planes and short fast meteors. The 
final number will be between 1 and 5 I think.....for tonight it is 3.

UFOV2.22 is working (quite well at this point) on the faster 
computer....better than HandyAvi ever did. (IMHO)

YCSentinel

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Francisco Ocaña" <albireo3000 at yahoo.es>
To: "Global Meteor Observing Forum" <meteorobs at meteorobs.org>
Sent: 2009/08/23 10:00
Subject: Re: (meteorobs) OT -Question to the UFOCaptureV2 users....

Hi Larry,

UfoCapture is not easy to configure because it has tenths of settings,
but when they are properly set, you have full control and knowledge
about your video.

It is impossible to speak about the *best* or the *right* configuration
for the software. Each camera needs a careful process, mostly trial and
error. You can find what each setting means at:
http://sonotaco.com/soft/UFO2/help/english/index.html

For instance, your problem now is the excess of blank captures. The
solution is raising the detecting threshold level and watch what
happens. For fireballs I used the value of 15 and I have 1 or 2
detection per night (plus planes). Now I detect 3rd magnitude meteors
with a threshold value of 7, but I have a 50% rate of false detections (
noise, many satellite flares, birds, bats, bugs, planes ...).

You said " I want to be sure my settings favor UFOCapture before I make
a judgement call on its value to me. " Its value is 18900Yen. Which now
means 200$, but 2 years ago was only 150$. Does it worth the 200$?
Probably, for sure it did the 150$. Handy Avi costs only 40$, but
UfoCapture is more versatile and meteor-dedicated. If you want just to
record fireballs maybe Handy Avi is enough, but UfoC enables you to do
the astrometry of the meteors of each night in less than 5 minutes.

My 2 cents,

Paco

Larry escribió:
> Hi Paul.
>
> I have been testing UFOCapture V2.22 on two different computers and 
> computer
> settings simultaneously.
>
> Quite frankly I am disappointed in the inconsistant behavior and too many
> captures of nothing and too short captures of something. Even the
> examination of hot pixels is different on both computers with Scint.
> masking, and noise tracking from THE SAME CAMERA SOURCE!
>
> Handyavi (IS) a lot more reliable on both of the computers when activated.
>
> That is why I asked the question..... I want to be sure my settings favor
> UFOCapture before I make a judgement call on its value to me.
>
> There have been no bright fireballs to be sure yet.........
>
> YCSentinel
>
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "Paul Pugh" <meteorobs at spacescan.co.uk>
> To: "Global Meteor Observing Forum" <meteorobs at meteorobs.org>
> Sent: 2009/08/22 09:30
> Subject: Re: (meteorobs) OT -Question to the UFOCaptureV2 users....
>
>
>
>> Hi, You  may wish to drop the UFO Capture forum a message too :-
>> http://sonotaco.jp/forum/viewforum.php?f=17
>>
>> I'd be interested in the answer - I suffer from a lot of commercial air
>> traffic (mid and high level) - so have been considering investing in UFO
>> for
>> some time now. I am currently using HandyAVI and experimenting with 
>> Motion
>> for Linux.
>>
>> Cheers
>>
>> Paul
>> --------------------------------
>> Spacescan.co.uk  53.1N 1.6W
>>
>>
>> ----- Original Message ----- 
>> From: "Larry" <ycsentinel at att.net>
>> To: <meteorobs at meteorobs.org>
>> Sent: Saturday, August 22, 2009 5:25 AM
>> Subject: (meteorobs) OT -Question to the UFOCaptureV2 users....
>>
>>
>>
>>> I am in the process of testing UFOCapture Ver 2.22 and need to know what
>>> might be recommended settings for a slow aircraft. My intent is to look
>>> for
>>> (any) skipped frames in the .avi recording with the capture card I use.
>>>
>>> The settings I need to know are:
>>>
>>> 1)  All of the Video Trigger settings.
>>> 2)  Detect size.
>>> 3)  All of the Still Image Capture settings.
>>>
>>> I am using both Scintillation masking & Detect Level Noise Tracking and
>>> have
>>> an operating mask to block local light triggering.
>>>
>>> Thank you. -YCSentinel
>>>
>>>
>

_______________________________________________
Mailing list meteorobs: meteorobs at meteorobs.org
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email: owner-meteorobs at meteorobs.org
http://lists.meteorobs.org/mailman/listinfo/meteorobs 