I captured some M81 and M82 LRGB data for the April Challenge but I forgot to change the default save format as .xisf and all the captures are .tif files from my attempt to increase my SharpCap Lucky Imaging frame rate. As a result, when I run the Pixinsight WBPP Script it seems unable to differentiate between the different colours and outputs one single greyscale image. I can convert to RGB and do a Channel Extraction but is there something I'm missing in the WBPP Script that can stack the subs and export the correct images? Graeme Statistics: Posted by Graeme1858 — Tue May 07, 2024 9:45 am ..read more

Just noticed the PI team released a new version of the gradient removal tool today. Incudes a model generation feature as well as a simplified model for gradient removal. The latter is supposedly similar to ABE. Think I'll try bouncing this off the March Astro Processing challenge data and see how it goes. --Steve Statistics: Posted by starfield — Thu Mar 21, 2024 9:35 pm ..read more

The new, the exciting, the reformatted TSS Astrophotography Processing Challenge March 2024 has been posted. Come and have a go. All are welcome. Regards Graeme Statistics: Posted by Graeme1858 — Sat Mar 16, 2024 9:15 am ..read more

I use starXterminator and have found it to be much better than the other programs I've tried. It is not perfect when up against an extremely bright star but you can run it and manually brush over any parts left over before continuing with processing. I think I would find it uncomfortable to use Starexteminator like this. I mean it is like just clicking a button on a photo and get a result, it is only a step further before AI will acquire, organise, stack,process and export a final photo for you, all by a click of a button. Statistics: Posted by Tycho65 — Wed Mar 13, 2024 12:59 pm ..read more

Hi, I have a simple question. I have got some files downloaded from a brilliant website, and it has stacked R,G,B and Luminance files. For example the Luminance file is a stack of 12 files, each 60 seconds long. 1) When I look at the FITS header (in Siril for example), it reads the exposure time is only 60 seconds, not 720 (12x60) seconds it should be. Is that right ? 2) On another point, how much exposure do you need to get reasonable star colour ? I have found it hard to get good star colours in mono images. Many thanks. Magnus Statistics: Posted by Tycho65 — Wed Mar 13, 2024 11:19 am ..read more

Thanks Kathy, I managed to get Siril to register and align the files, but the final RGB showed slightly misaligned stars, perhaps because the stars in each R,G,B were of different sizes, perhaps slight misalignment. I think I will need more files as you said to get decent results. Magnus Statistics: Posted by Tycho65 — Wed Mar 13, 2024 11:15 am ..read more

A friend of mine just showed what GradientCorrection did for his problem with lens flares on this subject. Not my data. Before After Statistics: Posted by AstroBee — Tue Mar 05, 2024 1:27 am ..read more

I gave it a try yesterday on several different types of images and this is what I found. Like GraxPert or ABE, the default settings on Galaxies, planetary nebulae or small contain nebulae work really well. But anytime there is a lot of diffuse nebulae filling a large portion of the sensor, these automated processes/scripts fail by removing too much of the nebulae. Shawn at VisibleDark on YT just put out a video a couple of days ago showing it off on M51 and then a larger nebula. Same results. Worked fantastic on the galaxy but destroyed lots of the nebula with the default settings. At least th ..read more

PI has just released a new Gradient Removal Tool. Thought I'd kick off a thread where we can share experiences. Unlike DBE, the tool works without the need to drop a bunch of sample points. There is some tuning that may need to be done but it seems pretty straight forward. I'll be curious what sorts of results people get. I've given it a whirl on a couple of galaxy images that I took from home and had some nasty and fairly complex gradients. It seemed to handle these well. Next up I' think I'm going try throwing it against a dusty target. If this tool works as well as it seems so far, it's de ..read more

If the problem is just that the different frames are misaligned, that's not a problem: it is normal. You will almost never have all frames come out of the camera perfectly aligned. The registration step of stacking is supposed to correct that. If registration is not aligning them, then it must be seeing some hot pixels that look more star-like than the actual stars. If the problem is that you can't stack them because you only have one frame of each, there are two ways around that (besides taking more frames, which is the preferred solution). I have had automatic stacking procedures complain t ..read more