Pipp problem.

[NIGHTBOY]

I'm just trying to process 1800 frames of the moon I just took and as soon as it gets to 53% it comes up 'problem writing to AVI file, failed with errors'

Any ideas guys??

[cgarry]

What AVI codec were you using to create the AVI File?  (DIB, ULRG or FMP4)

Do you have the exact error message?  I just tried searching the source code for the message you gave and could not find it.  The error message word for word would be good!  Also, most of the fatal AVI writing messages will give a line number too, that would really help here.

I assume your hard drive has enough free space for the created AVI file.

Cheers,

Chris

[Leveye]

Does the scratch disc it is writing to have enough space? If not change it in preferences.

[NIGHTBOY]

Ahh The file is coming straight off my SD card so I'll copy it on my comp and try again.

[NIGHTBOY]

Chris if it happens this time I'll take note of the exact wording/numbers.

[NIGHTBOY]

Yes that's what was happening it was writing it onto the sd card. Sorted.

[cgarry]

Ah, that explains it!  I have to admit that I have made that mistake myself...

Cheers,

Chris

[knobby]

just had the same problem ... hdd full !

[cgarry]

just had the same problem ... hdd full !

That is a constant problem with this imaging lark!

I bought a caddy for my laptop that allows me to swap the DVD drive for a second hard drive.  That gives me 1 TB of fast access storage space just for imaging.  Since I did that it has been constantly cloudy so I don't think that I shall be filling it up any time soon...

[knobby]

How are the write speeds doing that?

[cgarry]

The write speed is the same as the main hard drive (both SATA 2), possibly faster because the 2nd drive is not also being used for operating system purposes.

Cheers,

Chris

[NIGHTBOY]

After I put 1800 frames into pipp, the final result ended in 1680 frames. When I import this into as!2 do I have to change the 'number of frames to stack' box from 100 to 1680????

[Steve Ward]

Depends on the quality of the frames , I would let PIPP sort out the best 40% of the original and then let Autostakkert stack the top 50% of those .

No real benefit from stacking the rough frames , it's just a matter of suck it and see how many give the best image .

[NIGHTBOY]

So I I leave it as 100 and 50%, isn't that only goin to stack 100 frames???

[Steve Ward]

It's one or the other , you can set it to stack a percentage of the inputted frames or a specific number , if you choose a percentage the 'number of frames' box should be disabled and vice versa , same applies in Registax.

[NIGHTBOY]

Cheers Steve.

So what's best to choose for the greatest final result?? I don't care how long it takes to process as I can leave it going all night if need be.

[cgarry]

After I put 1800 frames into pipp, the final result ended in 1680 frames. When I import this into as!2 do I have to change the 'number of frames to stack' box from 100 to 1680????

I should mention here that there can be a few reasons why PIPP less frames than expected.

(1) The AVI file did not actually contain 1800 frames.  This is quite common with many capture programs and generally means that a frame had not been downloaded from the camera in time to write to the AVI file.

(2) If object detection is enabled, frames without an object (planet) completely in the frame are discarded.

(3) The number of output frames has been limited by quality.

I am guessing in your case that it is a combination of (1) and (2) that have output 1680 frames from the expected 1800.

Cheers,

Chris

[NIGHTBOY]

Is it best then to stack ALL the frames rather that a percentage of them?

I don't really understand it all tbh.

[cgarry]

No, you only want to stack a percentage of them to give AS!2 a chance to throw away the poor frames.  Stacking 2000 frames from 5000 or 6000 often works for me.  But that is from a fast frame rate camera working at over 60 fps.

Cheers,

Chris

[NIGHTBOY]

Ok so I should stick to the 50%???

Also, is it better to use the maximum allinment points? I know it takes ages when you select the highest number but if if results in a better image then in all for it.

[cgarry]

50% is not a bad amount, though if you do not stack enough frames you will end up with a noisy image that you cannot sharpen much. Experimentation is the key.

Using too many alignment points will produce less detail, not more:

http://stargazerslounge.com/topic/201474-as2-alignment-point-sizes/

I would stick to APs of size 70 or 80 for a start.

[NIGHTBOY]

Chris I don't been know what 'AP's' are!!! Pipp I understand, registax I sort of get but as!2 loses me....

[NIGHTBOY]

Ahh alignment points!! So what % is going to give me the best results??

[NIGHTBOY]

And (so sorry for all the questions) is it better to manually place the ap's? I've read to place them on sunspots (are these the parts that look like bright white spots?) and I also read that the boxes need to overlap??

[cgarry]

The % of frames to stack depend on the quality/consistency of the seeing.  You ideally want to stack as many frames as possible but you want to exclude the poor frames.  There was a good AS!2 tutorial floating around somewhere...

I have never managed to get better results by manually placing APs, though many good imagers do swear by it.  If you place them yourself you should make sure they overlap and are not too near the edge of the planet.  Personally I just select an AP size of 70 and use the auto placement feature.