M83 Slooh vs Telescope.live

Post your Remote Telescope images here and join in the discussion.
Post Reply
User avatar
Ben Cartwright SASS
Orion Spur Ambassador
Articles: 0
Online
Posts: 654
Joined: Fri May 17, 2019 10:39 am
4
Location: SE New England
Status:
Online

TSS Awards Badges

TSS Photo of the Day

M83 Slooh vs Telescope.live

#1

Post by Ben Cartwright SASS »


So I got the free trial week with Telescope.Live to try it out. So far I am impressed, have used the "one click observations" where you download other peoples imaging runs (which feels like cheating to me) and for 1 credit ($1) you can download a single run of about 1 hr 20 minutes, for M83 I downloaded a bundle of 6 imaging runs a total of 9 hours 20 minutes for 6 credits ($6) one downside is if you schedule your own imaging runs it is $50 to $120 an hour, that is steep.
How does it compare to Slooh? Well the files are easier to work with because they do quality control on the sub images before you get them (they say quality guaranteed) and the background skies are dark even on the blue filters while with Slooh they are often washed out. The subs make it easier to work them in Pixinsight than Slooh's. With Slooh you have to go through every frame looking for egg stars or streaks and deal with the washed out blue and even often green and red filtered images. The stars on TL are slightly sharper than Slooh, but I didn't run any star reduction fixes on the Slooh images.
But to me that is just like using my own scope for imaging I have to be the QC guy. Also to me the work required is part of the fun, being able to get images that match or exceed the TL and other sites images is my goal. With the OCO at TL I get 80 minutes of exposures where Slooh would take just over 2 minutes per run so I do multiple runs. TL uses 600 second exposures 10 minutes, while Slooh uses 50 seconds for Lums, and 25 seconds each for R,G and B each for just about 2 minutes. So to do 80 minutes would take 40 imaging runs, since you can schedule one run at at time, up to 5 at once it will take 8 times, usually 8 days as the schedule fills so it is almost like doing it in your backyard. I rarely get that many subs. But will be trying to do that.
The bottom line to me is that TL is easier to get really good results and Slooh takes a lot of work and patience but to my eyes (old and tired) what I can coax out of Slooh is comparable to TL just more work. Also while I tested a galaxy I will be testing Globular's and Nebula's to see the differing quality if any

Telescope live image 9 hrs 20 minutes Slooh image 21 minutes

Here is my Slooh image of M83 the best I have done and then the Telescope.Live image.
M83 usual settings hist + ABE green cast localhist-Edit-1.JPG
M83 hist-Edit-Edit-1.JPG
I might not always be right but I am never wrong, once I thought I was wrong, but I was mistaken...

Ferengi Rule of Acquisition #59
Free advice is seldom cheap

"Sometimes having is not so pleasing as wanting, it's not logical but it is true"
Commander Spock

Canon DSLR's R7, R6II, 5D, 7D2, 90D 21 lenses incl. 100-400L mk ii, 70-200L mk iii f/2.8, RF600/11
Lunt LS50 DS, LS80 DS, Lunt 102ED, Stellarvue SV80 APO, Orion ST80, 127 MAK, Skywatcher Evostar 120ED, 102 MAK, Celestron 8" Edge HD, 102AZ
Skywatcher EQ6-R Pro
ZWO ASI071MC-cool, ASI174mm, ASI174mm-cool, ASI178MC-cool, ASI290 mini, ASI120MM-S, ASI120MC Revolution Player One mm (178 chip)
User avatar
helicon United States of America
Co-Administrator
Co-Administrator
Articles: 584
Online
Posts: 12275
Joined: Mon May 06, 2019 1:35 pm
4
Location: Washington
Status:
Online

TSS Awards Badges

Re: M83 Slooh vs Telescope.live

#2

Post by helicon »


Nice image Jeff!
-Michael
Refractors: ES AR152 f/6.5 Achromat on Twilight II, Celestron 102mm XLT f/9.8 on Celestron Heavy Duty Alt Az mount, KOWA 90mm spotting scope
Binoculars: Celestron SkyMaster 15x70, Bushnell 10x50
Eyepieces: Various, GSO Superview, 9mm Plossl, Celestron 25mm Plossl
Camera: ZWO ASI 120
Naked Eye: Two Eyeballs
Latitude: 48.7229° N
User avatar
messier 111 Canada
Universal Ambassador
Articles: 0
Online
Posts: 9472
Joined: Mon Nov 09, 2020 2:49 am
3
Location: Canada's capital region .
Status:
Online

TSS Awards Badges

Re: M83 Slooh vs Telescope.live

#3

Post by messier 111 »


both are very nice . thx .
I LOVE REFRACTORS , :Astronomer1: :sprefac:

REFRACTOR , TS-Optics Doublet SD-APO 125 mm f/7.8 . Lunt 80mm MT Ha Doublet Refractor .

EYEPIECES, Delos , Delite and 26mm Nagler t5 , 2 zoom Svbony 7-21 , Orion Premium Linear BinoViewer .

FILTER , Nebustar 2 tele vue . Apm solar wedge . contrast booster 2 inches .

Mounts , berno mack 3 with telepod , cg-4 motorized , eq6 pro belt drive .

“Your assumptions are your windows on the world. Scrub them off every once in a while, or the light won't come in.”
― Isaac Asimov

Jean-Yves :flags-canada:
User avatar
pakarinen United States of America
Inter-Galactic Ambassador
Articles: 0
Offline
Posts: 4013
Joined: Fri Jun 14, 2019 3:33 pm
4
Location: NE Illinois
Status:
Offline

TSS Awards Badges

Re: M83 Slooh vs Telescope.live

#4

Post by pakarinen »


Huh. SLOOH looks better to me - more details in the nucleus. But, seriously, 9 hours versus 21 minutes? That's huge. How'd the processing times compare?
=============================================================================
I drink tea, I read books, I look at stars when I'm not cursing clouds. It's what I do.
=============================================================================
AT50, AT72EDII, ST80, ST102; Scopetech Zero, AZ-GTi, AZ Pronto; Innorel RT90C, Oberwerk 5000; Orion Giantview 15x70s, Vortex 8x42s, Navy surplus 7x50s, Nikon 10x50s
User avatar
Ben Cartwright SASS
Orion Spur Ambassador
Articles: 0
Online
Posts: 654
Joined: Fri May 17, 2019 10:39 am
4
Location: SE New England
Status:
Online

TSS Awards Badges

TSS Photo of the Day

Re: M83 Slooh vs Telescope.live

#5

Post by Ben Cartwright SASS »


I used the same script on each one (autointegrate) and the TL one took about twice as long, I didn't time it
I might not always be right but I am never wrong, once I thought I was wrong, but I was mistaken...

Ferengi Rule of Acquisition #59
Free advice is seldom cheap

"Sometimes having is not so pleasing as wanting, it's not logical but it is true"
Commander Spock

Canon DSLR's R7, R6II, 5D, 7D2, 90D 21 lenses incl. 100-400L mk ii, 70-200L mk iii f/2.8, RF600/11
Lunt LS50 DS, LS80 DS, Lunt 102ED, Stellarvue SV80 APO, Orion ST80, 127 MAK, Skywatcher Evostar 120ED, 102 MAK, Celestron 8" Edge HD, 102AZ
Skywatcher EQ6-R Pro
ZWO ASI071MC-cool, ASI174mm, ASI174mm-cool, ASI178MC-cool, ASI290 mini, ASI120MM-S, ASI120MC Revolution Player One mm (178 chip)
User avatar
WilliamPaolini United States of America
Saturn Ambassador
Articles: 9
Offline
Posts: 303
Joined: Tue May 25, 2021 8:57 pm
2
Location: Virginia, USA
Status:
Offline

TSS Awards Badges

Re: M83 Slooh vs Telescope.live

#6

Post by WilliamPaolini »


The image scale in the TL image is a little larger than the Slooh image. In addition it appears that the exposure (or aperture) is greater in the Slooh image as fainter objects are more exposed (e.g., the two small background galaxies to the left). To make a better visual comparison I reduced the scale of the TL image so it exactly matched the scale of the Slooh image. Slooh (LEFT) and TL (RIGHT).

I personally prefer the TL image. Star points are aesthetically rendered better and look more "realistic" whereas some of the star points in the Slooh image look too much like painted circle blobs (the more prominent diffraction spikes in the TL image I think add a better aesthetic). The two galaxies to the left look more like well rendered galaxies in the TL. Some of the subtle colors of non-white stars are rendered with more saturation in the TL (e.g. a nice yellow-orange star low in the frame). Finally, If exposure was lowered some then they more abundant finer details in the center of the galaxy in the TL vs. the Slooh (especially the dust lanes) would probably show more distinctly in the TL, but of course that would sacrifice the rather nice outer extent. I personally like the TL image much better as an aesthetic image that I would frame and display, but I do agree that the much greater cost given 9+ hrs is certainly off-putting.
.
temp.jpg
-Bill

U.S.A.F. Veteran - Visual Amateur Astronomer since 1966 - Fully Retired since 2019
8" f/5 Newt - Lunt 152 f/7.9 - TSA 102 f/8 - Vixen 81S f/7.7 - P.S.T. - Pentax 65ED II - Nikon 12x50 AE
Pentax XWs - Baader Morpheus - Takahashi LEs - Edmund RKEs - BST Starguiders - 6ZAO-II/5XO/4Abbe
PM and Email communications always welcomed
User avatar
Ben Cartwright SASS
Orion Spur Ambassador
Articles: 0
Online
Posts: 654
Joined: Fri May 17, 2019 10:39 am
4
Location: SE New England
Status:
Online

TSS Awards Badges

TSS Photo of the Day

Re: M83 Slooh vs Telescope.live

#7

Post by Ben Cartwright SASS »


Bill
I appreciate your analysis, I like to use Slooh even though it might not be as good, wonder if it would get better with a couple more hours of subs? I prefer to do all the work acquiring images, scheduling them, determining the best days and actual times how close to transit how far above the horizon etc. Slooh is $300 a year but I can do coordinate imaging etc and they have about 20 catalogs to choose from. It is great for doing AL programs as many objects need to be put in by coordinates, also you can tweak them.

Yes TL may give better stars but then again I didn't cull out any subs other than elongated stars. If I spent more time culling out less than perfect subs I think I would get better results. ALSO the final thing is doing so much of the acquisition work and being able to actually watch the imaging run live is really neat!

I will probably get a Bronze level on TL and down load others work but will work mostly with Slooh.

BESIDES IT IS NOT SOLAR --- SOLAR RULES!! shooting the sun beats DSO any day of the week! https://solarhead.shutterfly.com/
I might not always be right but I am never wrong, once I thought I was wrong, but I was mistaken...

Ferengi Rule of Acquisition #59
Free advice is seldom cheap

"Sometimes having is not so pleasing as wanting, it's not logical but it is true"
Commander Spock

Canon DSLR's R7, R6II, 5D, 7D2, 90D 21 lenses incl. 100-400L mk ii, 70-200L mk iii f/2.8, RF600/11
Lunt LS50 DS, LS80 DS, Lunt 102ED, Stellarvue SV80 APO, Orion ST80, 127 MAK, Skywatcher Evostar 120ED, 102 MAK, Celestron 8" Edge HD, 102AZ
Skywatcher EQ6-R Pro
ZWO ASI071MC-cool, ASI174mm, ASI174mm-cool, ASI178MC-cool, ASI290 mini, ASI120MM-S, ASI120MC Revolution Player One mm (178 chip)
Post Reply

Create an account or sign in to join the discussion

You need to be a member in order to post a reply

Create an account

Not a member? register to join our community
Members can start their own topics & subscribe to topics
It’s free and only takes a minute

Register

Sign in

Return to “Remote Imaging - Images and Discussions”