Jump to content

Banner.jpg.b89429c566825f6ab32bcafbada449c9.jpg

Imaging with two cameras, slightly different scales

lensman57

By lensman57
in Imaging - Discussion

Recommended Posts

lensman57

lensman57

Posted
Posted

Hi,

Is it possible to image and combine two captures of the same target but one shot at  2.77 arcsec/pixel and the other at 2.79 arcsec/pixel without resorting to the use of RegiStar that I don't have ( and I am not willing to buy either).

Many Thanks and Regards,

A.G

Link to comment
Share on other sites
lensman57

lensman57

Posted
  • Author
Posted

In Nebulosity it's possible by doing align-rotate-scale first on all frames by picking two reference starts.

Thank you, I do have nebulasity and was wondering if it would do as you suggested, you have now confirmed that it would.

Regards,

A.G

Link to comment
Share on other sites
steppenwolf

steppenwolf

Posted
Posted

MaxIM DL will also do this with a two star alignment but it is nowhere near as sophisticated as Registar. I have had good results using MaxIm like this so Nebulosity should work just fine but I can see that both programs would not compensate across the whole FOV if very different field curvatures were presented.

Xmas list:-

Registar

New Helicopter

Bottle of Benedictine

Link to comment
Share on other sites
ollypenrice

ollypenrice

Posted
Posted

MaxIM DL will also do this with a two star alignment but it is nowhere near as sophisticated as Registar. I have had good results using MaxIm like this so Nebulosity should work just fine but I can see that both programs would not compensate across the whole FOV if very different field curvatures were presented.

Xmas list:-

Registar

New Helicopter

Bottle of Benedictine

If you're chucking out the old helicopter I wouldn't mind it, Steve. Quite handy out here in the sticks. You can borrow my Registar if you deliver it in person.

Olly

Link to comment
Share on other sites
lensman57

lensman57

Posted
  • Author
Posted

Registar is a pretty old poorly supported one trick pony... but it does seem to do that trick very well indeed... I was always playing about with different cameras, scopes etc back when I used to actually do any imaging  and it was the right tool for the job ...

.

Peter....

That is one of the main reasons that I do not wish to part with $150.00 for a piece of software that was last updated in April 2004. Did Auriga imaging aquire this software through a takeover or they developed it? How does the free AstroTortilla compare with RegiStar ? It does appear to be a more complete package.

Regards,

A.G

Link to comment
Share on other sites
steppenwolf

steppenwolf

Posted
Posted

If you're chucking out the old helicopter I wouldn't mind it, Steve. Quite handy out here in the sticks. You can borrow my Registar if you deliver it in person.

Olly and I are close to a deal here but he's holding out on the Benedictine! So tight .......

That is one of the main reasons that I do not wish to part with $150.00 for a piece of software that was last updated in April 2004.

I hadn't realised that Registar was that old! But, if it does the job .......

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Jannis

Jannis

Posted
Posted

I'm wondering this question too, as i'm planning on combining IR data from my finderscopw with the QHY5L and the RGB data from the 200PDS with the 550d. Completly forgot about the curvature, and only had FOV in mind. >_<

In a way i hope i won't have to buy registar, as it's simply way too expencive for me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Sp@ce_d

Sp@ce_d

Posted
Posted

PixInsight seems to be getting better at this. I haven't had to use RegiStar nearly as often since the last update. Also handy as I process mainly on a Mac so saves boot camping just to use RegiStar. Guess I should have installed on a VM. Anyone been through re licensing RegiStar to a new build? Was it very painful?

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - now Free

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Gina

Gina

Posted
Posted

The user interface in RegiStar is certainly old-fashioned but I can live with it because this is such a great piece of software that does a perfect job.  Well worth the money IMO :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Jannis

Jannis

Posted
Posted

But is registar instead of DSS (for example) or in addition to it?

I only tried the demo version where i couldn't saver any pics, neitehr was i able to view the pic at 100% zoom. But i didn't quite find it as easy to use as DSS, and neither did i find similar stacking settings.

So, if i do but registar, shuold i do it like this:

1) stack all frames from each lens in DSS as normal, then stack the 2 stacked pictures from 2 different lenses in registar?

or

2) stack all frames from both lenses in registar and drop DSS completly?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
ollypenrice

ollypenrice

Posted
Posted

I don't look at software, I use it. Registar could indeed be updated because there are things it could do better, like ensure that combined images show no joint artefacts. But I can sort that easily enough. What it does well it does incredibly well and it is a mainstay of my imaging. The celestial sphere is spherical and the computer screen or page is flat. This means that any flat astrophoto is a cheat, or a fix, and Registar has the remarkable ability to take the 'fix' of one image and re-do it to fit the 'fix' of another. You can mix field curvatures, focal lengths, image scales, pixel dimensions... in a click. Don't knock it. It is ruddy marvellous and has played a major role in many of the best astrophotos ever taken. My main fear about its long V1 status is that it may disappear!

Olly

Link to comment
Share on other sites
ollypenrice

ollypenrice

Posted
Posted

So it can rescale and fit an image automatically as well? Like, say i have a 18mpix dslr frame, and i can then easily add data from my 1.2mpix camera with roughly same FOV?

Yes. I do that kind of thing all the time. This is a widefield shot at 328mm FL but the Horse and the little blue reflection nebula next to it have been enhanced by blending in data from an image shot at 2.4 metres FL. I'm linking to the full size so you can see the way it works.

http://ollypenrice.smugmug.com/Other/Best-of-Les-Granges/22435624_WLMPTM#!i=2855773038&k=CdR3znb&lb=1&s=A

Registar will align and resize in just a few seconds but the actual blending I do in Photoshop so I can make sure it's seamless. Also an application of high res data at full opacity tends to look artificial so a little craftsmanship is called for.

In this secopnd image, data from the TEC at 980mm and Tom O'Donoghue's FSQ106/Atik 11000 has been added to my Atik 4000/FSQ85 data. Quite a mixture!

http://ollypenrice.smugmug.com/Other/Best-of-Les-Granges/i-zMXNNfJ/0/X3/SAG%20TRIPLET%20HARGB%202SCOPV2-X3.jpg

And finally this last one combines Atik4000/TEC140 with SXVH36/ODK14.

http://ollypenrice.smugmug.com/Other/Best-of-Les-Granges/i-8xNGNsd/0/X3/COCOON%20ODK%20TEC%20WEB-X3.jpg

Olly

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Gina

Gina

Posted
Posted

My triple imaging rig consists of one Atik 460EX and two 314L+ with different FL lenses so that the FOV nearly matches but the pixel size of the two camera models is very different.  Mostly I use it for widefield narrow band imaging with Ha filter in front of the 460EX and OIII and SII on the 314L+s.  The separate colours are then stacked in DSS to produce three greyscale images of the separate colours.  RegiStar matches up the star patterns in the images and resizes and aligns the three image stacks to match.  The resulting three images are then processed in Ps - stretched to match histograms as well as possible then combined as red, green and blue channels.  The Ha image is copied and converted from greysacle to RGB Colour.  For the Hubble palette this forms the green channel and the SII is copied to the red and OIII copied to the blue channel.  The actual Hubble palette with the gold/blue colour scheme is obtained be using Selective Color to adjust the colour balance.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
davew

davew

Posted
Posted

RegiStar does what it does so very well. I've been using it for a few years now and it's still in the lead, as far as I can tell, for star centre by star centre aligning. The GUI is fine by me and looks an awful lot like most other programmes I've got ! The fancier the GUI the heavier it is on resources.

I particularly like it's ability to visually "Enhance" stars that are showing comma and/or CA. So long as you register the right way round ! Very handy for different camera lenses.

There are two updates that I can see that haven't been mentioned. One is an ability to create better star masks. If that's what you want.

The second would be to not only open 32bit Fits but to save as 32 bit Fits or Tiff. That would then give the opportunity to levels stretch or DDP in 32bit if required. Neither bother me that much.

Other than that, the only reason I can think of not to buy it is the function to price ratio not the date it was produced.

Dave.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue. By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.