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

Larry ycsentinel at att.net
Fri Aug 28 10:02:14 EDT 2009


Hi Roberto.

Too much near "HORIZON" curvature with all-sky cameras's  to do that safely?

Regards, -YCSentinel


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Roberto Haver" <R.HAVER at mclink.it>
To: <meteorobs at meteorobs.org>
Sent: 2009/08/28 01:47
Subject: Re: (meteorobs) OT -Question to the UFOCaptureV2. -PAUL PUGH 
et.al.,


Hi all,
If not memory badly the resolution with Metric is lowland confronted with 
UfoC. For this reason it demands less memory.
Moreover in my case also activating the Scintillation Mask my computer has 
need of 1M of RAM is only 1.2Ghz processor.
With this configuration it comes used approximately 40/45% of the memory.
Per le meteore poco luminose ho impostato Detect Size al valore 2.
My main problems of false recording are due partially from my locality of 
observation (from the city of Rome with many airplane!!!) and above all from 
the bugs!
The bugs have nearly always incurvate trajectories a lot and have asked the 
creators of UfoC to find a solution considering the irregular and not 
rectilinear movement.
But they had answered that if applied this correction there were the risk 
that did not come recorded the fireball! I have not understood the answer 
considering that the fireball they do not have a trajectory that ago 
circles, inverts the march ago or angles of 90 degrees!
Sorry for bad enghlish!
Roberto Haver

> ==========================
> Date: Thu, 27 Aug 2009 23:07:52 +0200
> From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Francisco_Oca=F1a?= <albireo3000 at yahoo.es>
> To: Global Meteor Observing Forum <meteorobs at meteorobs.org>
> Subject: Re: (meteorobs) OT -Question to the UFOCaptureV2. -PAUL
> PUGH et.al.,
> ==========================
>
> Well, I forgot to metion that UFOC needs a fast processor, at
> least
> 2Ghz. I tried a 1Ghz one, and the software runs only with half
> resolution AVI. Not sure what HandyAvi needs, but Metrec beats
> them all.
> And not everybody has a fast computer to use just for fireball
> recording
> ( I use one borrowed, hehe). Metrec option should be considered
> too.
>
> Not sure why not using Scintillation Mask is the best solution
> for you.
> I can´t detect faint meteors without it because starlight variations
> would cause a trigger (but remember that the Scintillation Mask
> uses a
> lot of your processor).
>
> I find the Detect Level Noise Tracking really useful as the conditions
> vary a lot during the night, maybe 10 or 20 "units" (far more
> than the 7
> I use as a threshold value). And I use 3 as Detect Size as it
> works when
> I was working with the settings.
>
> The Frame Shift Diff. number I have always used '1'. I can not
> imagine
> what a difference other value could make. Tell us your results.
> For the
> planes I would recommend you to try the Slow Object Mask. The
> Dark
> Object Mask works also quite fine during the twilight.
>
> Do you have already recorded any fireball? Best,
>
> Paco
>
> Larry escribió:
> > 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
> >
> >
>
> _______________________________________________
> Mailing list meteorobs: meteorobs at meteorobs.org
> To UNSUBSCRIBE, email: owner-meteorobs at meteorobs.org
> http://lists.meteorobs.org/mailman/listinfo/meteorobs



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





More information about the Meteorobs mailing list