Registax 6 Solar

[robindurant]

I cant get R6 to work on my Ha Solar images. I get strange artifacts/ shapes on the resulting image after pressing "Stack" sometimes big chunks taken out of the Sun. Can anyone advise me on the best settings for this type of imaging. I am sure it should work on Solar. When using Avistack its fine, so its not the image

Thanks

Robin

[Bizibilder]

I would suggest Registax 5, Avistack or Autostakkert2 - Registax 6 is notoriously difficult to work with, especially if you have the slightest drift in your .avi's. I often stack in one of the alternatives and just R6 for the advanced wavelet capabilities.

[sologuitarist61]

I always use Registax 5 as well, Registax 6 doesn't seem to like RAW files to well either.

[JamesF]

If you preprocess RAW files with PIPP first it can generate TIFFs which Registax can cope with. The results are definitely better using TIFFs than JPEGs.

James

[JamesF]

Registax v6 does seem to be far less tolerant of variable image quality than v5. When it works it seems to do a better job than either v5 or AS!2, but the problem is often getting it to work in the first place. When it produces "crazed" images I've found it can help to be more careful about selection of the reference frame, and also to select fewer frames to stack (based on quality), then compare the results with the output of v5 and AS!2 to see which you prefer, applying wavelets in v6 to whichever image you stack you prefer (or, in fact, applying wavelets to them all and then seeing which final image you prefer).

It's possible that using the contrast stretch option in v6 makes a difference too, but I'm not certain about that at the moment.

James

[sologuitarist61]

If you preprocess RAW files with PIPP first it can generate TIFFs which Registax can cope with. The results are definitely better using TIFFs than JPEGs.

James

I'm getting old and set in my ways James so if it works for me in Registax 5 but doesn't in version 6, then I just carry on with 5. I must admit that for solar imaging I stil use jpegs for ease of use and smaller file size if nothing else, I don't find the loss of quality to be a hardship. I just go for the easy option every time I'm afraid.

[JamesF]

Sounds fair enough to me

James