limiting factors of CHDK for extended time-lapse

  • 90 Replies
  • 35478 Views
Re: limiting factors of CHDK for extended time-lapse
« Reply #20 on: 04 / August / 2018, 05:20:36 »
Advertisements
What shot interval do you anticipate using?
Ported :   A1200    SD940   G10    Powershot N    G16

*

Offline Sdack

  • ***
  • 191
Re: limiting factors of CHDK for extended time-lapse
« Reply #21 on: 04 / August / 2018, 05:23:34 »
So far I'm going with 60 seconds.
9 hours a day produces 540 images, or around 20 seconds of video, for a speed up factor if around 1,500 times realtime

*

Offline blackhole

  • *****
  • 642
  • A590IS 101b
    • Planetary astrophotography
Re: limiting factors of CHDK for extended time-lapse
« Reply #22 on: 04 / August / 2018, 06:04:37 »
Nitrogen can also be used, there is no significant difference in the properties.
I used Argon because the workshop where I got the valves used only that gas.
I'm not sure if filling with nitrogen is feasible in the way like is described in the video.
The nitrogen is much lighter and always mixes with surrounding gases.I think there will be nothing without vacuuming before filling with nitrogen.Or this process will last very, very long.

Re: limiting factors of CHDK for extended time-lapse
« Reply #23 on: 04 / August / 2018, 10:38:08 »
So far I'm going with 60 seconds.
9 hours a day produces 540 images, or around 20 seconds of video, for a speed up factor if around 1,500 times realtime
My guess is that you are right at the threshold where the startup energy needed to run the motors and enable the sensor/display once per minute might be more than what is needed simply leaving the camera running and using one of the better CHDK power saving modes.

Perhaps a couple of test runs would tell you? Fully charge the battery, shoot at a one minute interval, and run until the battery expires.  Use the arduono for some runs and something like ultimate.lua or miser.lua for the others trying its better power saving modes. 

It would be possible to stop when the battery hits a defined threshold but I wonder about the "recovery" effect when you actually turn the camera off and on and the battery briefly seems to have more charge.

I can send you a quick and dirty script to use with the Arduino.

Edit :  this old posting might be of some small interest :  Battery Intervalometer although there was a new script function to turn off the LCD added to CHDK after these tests were done. I'm updating it now and will add a "power off after one shot" mode.
« Last Edit: 04 / August / 2018, 12:18:14 by waterwingz »
Ported :   A1200    SD940   G10    Powershot N    G16


*

Offline reyalp

  • ******
  • 11592
Re: limiting factors of CHDK for extended time-lapse
« Reply #24 on: 04 / August / 2018, 17:25:29 »
My guess is that you are right at the threshold where the startup energy needed to run the motors and enable the sensor/display once per minute might be more than what is needed simply leaving the camera running and using one of the better CHDK power saving modes.
With a LOT more wear and tear on the lens actuators.

It would definitely be interesting to know how these cameras handle tens of thousands of stow/unstow cycles, so @Sdack if you go this route, please report back.
Don't forget what the H stands for.

*

Offline Sdack

  • ***
  • 191
Re: limiting factors of CHDK for extended time-lapse
« Reply #25 on: 04 / August / 2018, 17:26:55 »
You're probably spot on there, only some scientific tests will prove it one way or another.

I just ordered a cheap DC wattmeter from AliExpress, which monitors accumulated draw.
Using that I can compare usage over an hour or two, rather than a full battery expiration.  If I always start with a freshly charged battery, it should be a level playing field.

I will report back my results.

Dons white coat..

*

Offline Sdack

  • ***
  • 191
Re: limiting factors of CHDK for extended time-lapse
« Reply #26 on: 04 / August / 2018, 17:39:24 »
Hi Reyalp,

I've not read anything about lens actuators being disabled.  Is that beyond the scope of CHDK..  a Canon hardware controller thing?

My cameras are mounted such that the lens is millimetres from the enclosure glass at zero zoom.  I am happy to crop into the high resolution frame, which is close on 6K, so, if there's a way to suppress the lens retractions, I am up for that.  The enclosure will keep dust off the lens.

I have one IXUS160 which has run 6 months on a project, so I might see if I can get it open to see if the actuator wired are accessible.

I'll be sure not to short the flash capacitor though.. I've hear that's quite a jack in the box.
Sdack


Re: limiting factors of CHDK for extended time-lapse
« Reply #27 on: 04 / August / 2018, 17:40:46 »
I just ordered a cheap DC wattmeter from AliExpress, which monitors accumulated draw.
We'll see if I can update the script faster than AliExpress can get the monitor to you..

Quote
I will report back my results.
Still shooting with an IXUS160?  From a quick look at the manual, it does not have a native sleep mode or shortcut key or OVF.  So that limits the power saving options a bit.

Ported :   A1200    SD940   G10    Powershot N    G16


Re: limiting factors of CHDK for extended time-lapse
« Reply #28 on: 04 / August / 2018, 17:44:28 »
I've not read anything about lens actuators being disabled.  Is that beyond the scope of CHDK..  a Canon hardware controller thing?
I'm pretty sure @reyalp was not suggesting disabling anything. He was just pointing out that power cycling the camera adds wear & tear on the mechanical components and motors.
Quote
I have one IXUS160 which has run 6 months on a project, so I might see if I can get it open to see if the actuator wired are accessible.
Disabling any of the actuator will likely brick the camera.  The firmware seems to expect to see motor movement and locks up with a nasty error message when it does not happen.
Ported :   A1200    SD940   G10    Powershot N    G16

*

Offline Sdack

  • ***
  • 191
Re: limiting factors of CHDK for extended time-lapse
« Reply #29 on: 04 / August / 2018, 17:50:42 »
Hi
The IXUS160 is the newest, reasonably priced and readily available camera I have managed to identify from the PID list.

I have asked on the forum before for upgrade recommendations but people seem reluctant or perhaps too polite to offer any.

There are so many cameras and, being a newbie to the Canon range, I've been confused and overwhelmed several times trying to find something better.  I've also been a bit reluctant to chance the move to another CHDH port.


 

Related Topics