4k resolution monitors??????

[georgekhan]

I am still awaiting delivery of my Atik Horizon, but am considering the purchase of a '4K' Ultra HD Monitor.  Has anybody hooked up an Atik Horizon by USB3 to an Intel NUC (or similar) computer that is capable of handling '4k' Ultra HD  graphics and then output the data to a '4K' monitor by HDMI?

Given the Horizon's huge 4644 x 3505 resolution might its large FOV not fit into a typical (1024 x 1080) laptop screen unless one is running everything in lower resolutions? So will it benefit from a 4K graphics card and 4K monitor?

Will Atik Infinity and Artemis software cope at full 16Megapixel resolution? Or is it a case of having to do everything at low resolution, and only apply higher resolutions for a narrow 'Region of Interest'? Or are you stuck at the selected resolution?

Any guidance appreciated (n.b. I have enquired with Atik Support).

[dpaul]

Hi George,

I have both the Horizon color and the mono camera (mostly I use the mono). I also connect it to a Dell XPS Laptop with 4K screen (and 32 ram). I acquired the 4K version because the colors are beautiful when post-processing the data with Pixinsight.
Of course the resolution during capture (Artemis and Infinity) looks great too.


I have no issues whatsoever with this set up - I've done 1x1 binning (each file is about 32 MB) and 2x2 binning (about 7.5 MB).


Hope this helps


David

[Noah4x4]

I too  output by a long 'active' USB3.0 cable into my warm 'mission control' where processing is done on an Intel i5 NUC and output over its 'Thunderbolt' display port to a 4K UHD monitor.  It is jaw-dropping "wow" for EAA. But you do need a graphics card that can handle it. If your regular laptop is merely 1080p 'HD' capable then I suspect that plugging in an external 'UHD' display device might be unproductive. However, the Intel NUC can handle 'Thunderbolt' ultra fast display port technology and 4K graphics (here think 'gaming machine' capability at a lesser price).  I did experiment with a wholly Wireless set up using Windows Remote Desktop until I realised my 1080p 'HD' laptop receiver was the least capable device in the chain. I then directly hooked up a 4K monitor to the NUC and decided USB3.0 and 'UHD' display was for me.

To be fair, you don't actually need a 4K UHD monitor to enjoy the Atik Horizon, so paying a premium price if doing (say) regular long exposure AP might not be cost justified. However, I use Hyperstar which is 'fast' (1.9/f) so no polar alignment routine or guiding is necessary. The FOV is enormous too. But that has a cost as regards magnification and camera <zoom> is more necessary on tiny DSOs. That is where I perceive the 4K UHD experience is most beneficial. I can <zoom> further in withoit pixelation than on a 1080p 'HD' monitor and the EAA experience is hence immersive. But if you want 'still' long exposure photographs with camera affixed at the rear of your OTA  then other post processing options might be as pleasing. I suppose it's another instance of "why buy cotton if you can afford silk". But with 4k UHD display devices tumbling, why not? My Samsung 4K UHD monitor was less than £260. They were £6,000 less than three years ago!

[Noah4x4]

An update about my 4k UHD rig.

I have been running a 10M USB3 'active' extension cable from my Atik Horizon camera on Hyperstar  to an Intel NUC with Iris 640 Plus Graphics located in my warm 'mission control' and then to a 4K UHD monitor. Results are generally great especially for EAA, and where objects are faint it is still possible to increase sensitivity by binning. As a relatively novice photographer , I am finding things quite easy, especially when using Infinity Software.

However, I have suffered some repeated lag and connectivity problems and Atik replaced my original slightly wobbly USB3  camera port with the newer more robust version (great service thanks!).  But that still hasn't totally cured the problem. So I have since switched to a solution using Cat 6 Ethernet cable; whilst networking two sufficiently powerful computers and using Windows 10 Pro Remote Desktop to control that at the scope. I did try this earlier over 802.11ac WiFi, but that too spluttered. However, cat 6 cabling now appears to be offering the stability I desire.

What seems fairly clear to me is that 'active' USB3 extension cables can be a tad more limited than advertised. 'Active' USB 3.0 is supposed to be OK up to 15 Metres/33 feet. Frankly,  I am not convinced having spent £59 on a 10M "high quality" version and still suffered some flakiness. Cat 6 or HDMI does appear to be a much better solution if you don't plan to sit at the scope  and seek remote control.

[Noah4x4]

Update - WiFi tip.

If using Windows Remote Desktop wirelessly between two computers do not depend on the default <auto-seek connection>.  Instead select via <Options>< Experience.>  <WAN 10Mps or higher). This has much improved the WiFi connectivity issues I was suffering with end to end 4k UHD. I believe the default was selecting too low a bandwidth setting.

[Noah4x4]

An update on WiFi using Windows Remote Desktop between two computers (one scope side, one indoors) and terminating with a 4K UHD monitor. As per my previous post, cat6 cable works fine, but WiFi is more challenging. But I think I have solved it....

In addition to selecting <WAN 10 Mbps> as earlier suggested, try separating your dual band channels into separate 5 Ghz and 2.4 Ghz channels. This is easy with a BT Home Hub 5/6. You will then see an additional channel dedicated to 5 Ghz.  Hence force your 5 Ghz wireless adapters to connect to that to improve performance.

If you don't have 5 Ghz wireless adapters, buy a USB plug in model and disable your computers internal 2.4 Ghz version via Device Manager. Note there are two versions, 433 Mbps and 870 Mbps. I found either work fine provided your network range is adequate. Mine wasn't, so I purchased a Netgear EX8000 wireless extender. Much better than my previous cheap dual band model and it also offers 'mesh' technology (much superior). The key to success with 4K 'end to end'  does seem to be a need to ensure you are connected to the 5 Ghz channel. Simple 'dual-band' may mean you are auto-connecting at merely 2.4 Ghz.

However , tests using Windows ResMon utility suggest that bandwidth and network speed isn't the actual problem. Reliability of connection (distance/range) is much more important. What most surprised me was the load on computer and graphics card on the scope side computer. I am using two Intel i5 NUCs with Iris Plus 640 Graphics and Optane memory. I suspect you won't get a 4K display to run comfortably on much less (so I suggest you don't attempt with cheaper Compute Sticks.

Lastly, I question whether chasing 4K UHD is actually worth it unless using Hyperstar which increases FOV x 5, but correspondingly reduces magnification. The extra <zoom> is beneficial. However, at regular magnification (say with f6.3 reducer) , you won't notice much difference at 1080p, which is much less challenging over wireless.

[Noah4x4]

I have now totally solved the wireless remote control 4K UHD conundrum with some help from a few pals in Cloudy Nights...

In Windows 10 Pro I have wholly 'disabled' the RemoteFX compression algorithm via <Settings>;<Edit Group Policy>;<Computer Configuration>;<Administrative Templates>;<Windows Components>;<Remote Desktop Services>;<Remote Desktop Session Host><Configure Compression for Remote Desktop Compression>. This compression was preventing fuller use of the speed/capabilities of my WAN network.

This is a feature in Windows 10 Pro and is not in Windows 10 Home (which doesn't support RDP except as a dumb terminal).

After eliminating RemoteFX compression from Windows Remote Desktop, Atik Infinity is absolutely turbo charged over RDP on an 802.11ac network. It's as good as using cat 6 cable. But you do need 433Mbps wireless adapters etc.