LL v SX for Cx2 with W7

[nytecam]

Hi – we are all exceedingly grateful to Paul for his amazing LL s/w and this post is in no way an adverse reflection on that - just my incompetance.   Last autumn I reported here that LLv0.9 gave strange results via my Window 7 laptop with colour Cx2 Lodestar eg that the images were fuzzy or blurred.   Paul and other queried that “had I checked the hi-res option in LL s/w”  - and I responded “yes”.  Reloading the s/w made no difference.

I thought I’d await this year’s release of LLv0.11, with improved colour control, and try again.  The same blurred results and the same “ had I checked the hi-res option” advise.

My apologies to Robert f15p5 -“the difference of f3 against f10 – nothing else”- with my curt “NOT”.  The pics below prove my point that it’s nothing to do with scope optics, f/ratios or seeing conditions.  The same blurred results occur under a ‘hot pixel map’ [dark frame] with the scope capped so no starlight is reaching the sensor as shown below. 

For the annotated dark frames 1/2/3 [60sec exps], the contrast/ colour have been greatly exaggerated for clarity with a section inset enlarged x3.3.  SX dark frame at zero colour setting.  The M1 Crab star images 5 [LL] and 6 [sX] of are both 45sec exp with normal stretching – no darks or flats used.  It's obvious the SX image is much sharper.

The most prominent hot pixel, as it usually appears on star images, is circled.   On the dark frames 1/2 this hot [yellow] pixel is greatly enlarged via LL but correctly sampled and much smaller via the SX s/w.  Why?

Help - who’s getting great sharp results with Cx2/LL/W7 ?   Looking at my M1 via SX s/w you can see a worthwhile difference !

[NickK]

Hmm are those compressed? JPEG artefacts perhaps?

[Paul81]

Hi Maurice,

Do you see the same issue with your mono camera? One guess that comes to mind is the bayer CYMG to RGB interpolation algorithm I am using. To convert the raw pixel data to colour I use information from neighbouring pixels, I suspect this would mean a single hot pixel would spread its influence out and thus appear bigger. For me this has always highlighted the need to use darks.

I'd like at some point to add a hot pixel rejection filter in, so perhaps this would minimise such effects.

Paul

[nytecam]

Hi Paul - the early LL worked to perfection on the Lodestar mono MX2 with my Toshiba W7 laptop but have not used that combo of late.   

With LLv0.9 and v0.11 on the Lodestar OSC Cx2 I get fuzzy enlarged square images [both stars or hot pixels in dark frames] when set to hi-res OR lo-res as demoed above !  In case anyone has compared the above images on their smart-phone I attach an enlarged crop of M1 [45s exps] via LLv0.11 and basic SX s/w and the latter are much sharper - why would that be ?

Still awaiting contact with Windows + LL + Lodestar colour user