Stuart1971

Well, if you think BlurX was good, he has gone and done it again with this new tool….😂

Between us we would have got it sorted…..👍🏻

I really admire you guys who have lost so much money and are still in such good spirits, if it was me I would not rest until I had some sort of payback, and am pretty sure one way or another I would have found the guy by now….. I had a quote of them at the start of lockdown for an obsy, and I was so close to going for it, wow, am I glad I built my own instead….

Just been doing some more messing around This was an unguided stack of Veil images I took with an old CCD, some time ago, I was testing my EQ8 unguided, these are 5 min unguided subs, and PA was about 4 mins off, there are about 20 images in the stack, see the top to bottom oblong stars from lack of guiding and poor PA, then ran the image through BlurX, and it’s almost a useable image, with more processing of course…. Before After

It works even better if you specify the PSF to run, use the tool in PI to see the FWHM figures for the image, and take the average and use that, it works even better then….rather than the auto option….👍🏻

So how are you now using the BlurX on your galaxies…as you don’t use PI…🤔

Welcome, and enjoy the site….👍🏻

Can I ask, why are you so anti PI, it really is an incredible piece of software, and not that hard to use either, ok, so nowhere near as cheap as Affinity, but when there is a new affinity version you have to buy it, so in time you will end up spending as much….Just curious….🤔

Super image, a run through BlurX will sort those elongated corner stars too….👍🏻👏🏻

Super image….👏🏻 Did you by any chance use the Noise reduction before using BlurX, as there are some artefacts on the stars that seem to be caused by this, I found this out when re doing some of my data…BlurX needs to be used first….

I have asked Russ, about porting the old GradientX to PI, and his reply, was that an AI version may be on the cards for PI…..👍🏻

It won’t work in PS, something to do with it needing linear data…🤷🏼‍♂️ I switched to PI recently and find it pretty straight forward, easier than any other I have used….maybe it just suits my way of thinking…..who knows…

According to Russ himself, there are no plans for it….🙁

Up until 3 months ago, I was an APP and PS user, then I thought I would try PI, and was worried how hard it would be, and it really isn’t, at all. I watched a boat load of YouTube videos and found it really user friendly, and intuitive, and not at all what I had been led to believe, or imagined… So my advice, BlurXT aside, give the free trial a go, you may be really surprised just how intuitive it is, and the WBPP script is as good as APP for stacking and integration, and just as easy to use….👍🏻

Here is a gif of the difference I get on corner stars with BXT, and using correct only option…

You deffo need, and will benefit from having dew bands, it’s as simple as that….👍🏻

I, personally am only using the “correct only” option for my corner stars, I am not using any other option as I am not convinced that it’s not adding detail that was not there already in my images, and so would not be “real”, but for me it’s worth the cost just to give me much better star shapes to the corners of my images…

Well, I thought so, I have now got the flattener for my scope and so the issue are no where near as bad, but still a tiny bit of tilt I can’t seem to get rid of, well I assume it’s tilt, or maybe it just the flattener is still not correcting right to the edges, either way this seems to solve the issue….👍🏻

Well here are my before and after images, these were very poor images with no calibration and full of noise, also before I had the flattener and also with poor tilt in the left bottom corner shown in these images, well what can I say…wow…. EDIT: This was using the “correct only” setting, so no sharpening on anything, just star shape correction…./

Me too, that’s all I got so far….well this is just for the trial version….

I don’t suppose you have a before and after showing the difference in the corners…?

Does it do anything for very slight elongated stars, due to a tiny bit of tilt in one corner…? As that would be very welcome for a lot of people….and the software is cheaper than a quality tilt adjuster….👍🏻😀

Totally agree….👍🏻

I think the low res one with BlurX will be the winner, as the other one will be “real data” but would be interesting to see….agreed….

It does, I agree, but I can’t help thinking the tool is just adding information that was not there to start with, which is just wrong, this tool was trained with Hubble data, ….so it’s adding what it think should be there based on what the AI has been trained on… I’m not sure this is right personally…I’m on the fence…🤔🤔