Jump to content

Banner.jpg.b83b14cd4142fe10848741bb2a14c66b.jpg

M31 first meager attempt!

ianpwilliams

Recommended Posts

Psychobilly

Psychobilly

Posted
Posted

Will people please stop perpetuating the myth that CS2 is a FREE and LEGAL download from Adobe - It isn't...

It is only legal to download and use it is you are a previous licensed user of the product. Adobe removed their online activation servers for the older products.

The information is on the website but I guess people chose to ignore it...


Here's a link to the "official" Adobe statement ....

http://blogs.adobe.c...on-servers.html


And just in case you don't want to foillow it...

Adobe has disabled the activation server for CS2 products, including Acrobat 7, because of a technical issue.
These products were released more than seven years ago, do not run on many modern operating systems, and are no longer supported.
 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • Replies 109
  • Created
  • Last Reply
Thalestris24

Thalestris24

Posted
Posted

Yes, but since then Adobe haven't concerned themselves with it and it's become freely available but unsupported. It is after all pretty old now and has lots of limitations. There are, of course, other, and better, alternatives. Startools is pretty good for 50 Euros :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Psychobilly

Psychobilly

Posted
Posted

I apologise if it was wrong to post the link but, in any case, a quick Google and all is revealed!

No worries - we have to protect the forum from any issues that might arise if we are seen to be "condoning"  the use of un-licensed software....  I guess a clean-up will take place in the near future to get the thread back on track.

Peter...

Link to comment
Share on other sites
lensman57

lensman57

Posted
Posted

We contacted Adobe directly for advice when "get adobe CS2  for free"  first appaeared all over the internet a few years ago,,.

Peter...

It was not supposed to be for free but as Adobe could not maintain the server that was responsible for keeping an eye on the registered users they just put everything up on the net with the serial numbers, lets just sat that it was a very charitable act on behalf of the Adobe even if they did not intended it to be.

Regards,

A.G

Link to comment
Share on other sites
RikM

RikM

Posted
Posted

Adobe have not changed their stance on the CS2 download. It is only intended for use by people who bought licences for CS2 products and who need to reinstall/re activate their software.

You can find the background info and a couple of clear statements from Adobe here.

http://prodesigntools.com/about-adobe-cs2-free-download-rumor.html

The last time the question "is CS2 free now?" was asked on the Adobe forum was 18th November and the replay, as always, was " No, it is not free for everyone. You need a licence, otherwise it is an illegal download".

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Thalestris24

Thalestris24

Posted
Posted

It seems a moot point to me. Since they provided it for download I think that everyone in the world that has wanted it subsequently downloaded it, regardless of the legalese. It still remains available. That said, it's outdated and not a particular good piece of software but seems a useful staging post for getting into certain aspects of AP post-processing. Adobe suggest 'Elements' is better and can be purchased, but they would say that, wouldn't they :) I think if I buy any software, it will be PI - when I can afford it! :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Scott

Scott

Posted
Posted

I never said anything about it being free, I picked up my copy second hand a long time ago. Am I missing something or has a post been deleted somewhere?

Sorry for the confusion, the mods comments re: free download were directed at post which have been hidden, not yours. 

Again, I apolagise :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites
mcinek82

mcinek82

Posted
Posted

Did you do that with DSS and GIMP? And could I see a JPEG of your stacked TIFF to compare?

I'm keen on knowing how much can be done with GIMP. Clearly it looks like Pix is the best option, but it's also an expensive commitment.

Hello, I'm glad to help. You are correct, I only used DSS and Gimp. As I mentioned, I usually flatten the gamma curve in DSS, save an intermediate result and process it later in Gimp. Below is my output of stacked subs that produced the previously shown result (only flattening of gamma applied, uncropped, resized to 1024x681).

post-36167-0-55090500-1418047357_thumb.j

Completely unmodified:

post-36167-0-31595600-1418047327_thumb.j

Actually, You made me try again with my data - this time I played with DSS only: slightly lowered red component, saturation +18%, Dark 0, 100%, Mid 16, 42%, Light 30, 60% and voila:

post-36167-0-09636400-1418048055_thumb.j

Image info file's in comment/despription (I hope).

Link to comment
Share on other sites
RikM

RikM

Posted
Posted

Hello, I'm glad to help. You are correct, I only used DSS and Gimp. As I mentioned, I usually flatten the gamma curve in DSS, save an intermediate result and process it later in Gimp. Below is my output of stacked subs that produced the previously shown result (only flattening of gamma applied, uncropped, resized to 1024x681).

attachicon.gifautosave2_flattened_RGB-aligned_DSS_output_resized.jpg

Completely unmodified:

attachicon.gifAutosave_unmodified_DSS_output_resized.jpg

Actually, You made me try again with my data - this time I played with DSS only: slightly lowered red component, saturation +18%, Dark 0, 100%, Mid 16, 42%, Light 30, 60% and voila:

attachicon.gifM42, raw, 10+8 images, v2, resized.jpg

Image info file's in comment/despription (I hope).

There is loads more that can be brought out with GIMP. This is a quick tweak of your top image.

post-5915-0-55662700-1418070056_thumb.jp

Link to comment
Share on other sites
carastro

carastro

Posted
Posted

Made some good progress here Ian.

I tried to process it, but I find it almost impossible to process images without flats applied.  Those who use Pixinsight seem to be able to deal with it, but I am not a Pixinsight user.

Carole 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
ianpwilliams

ianpwilliams

Posted
  • Author
Posted

A quick stack of my new batch and there doesn't seem to be a massive difference, although I know that there will be detail in there that I can't get to.

In DSS should you always aim for 50 stars in the star detection bit? Because in this instance that means lowering the slider as low as 10%.

I'm also wondering if my flats are usable or not. I'll have a look tomorrow.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
ianpwilliams

ianpwilliams

Posted
  • Author
Posted

Also, my Zlights were ISO400, because I was trying to get the best ISO setting for the 90-second sub length, based on the current circumstances, using the histogram, as previously advised. So hopefully using 400ISO won't have limited my options in processing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
lensman57

lensman57

Posted
Posted

A quick stack of my new batch and there doesn't seem to be a massive difference, although I know that there will be detail in there that I can't get to.

In DSS should you always aim for 50 stars in the star detection bit? Because in this instance that means lowering the slider as low as 10%.

I'm also wondering if my flats are usable or not. I'll have a look tomorrow.

Using ISO 400 should help with noise a bit as the iso setting has no bearing on the QE of the sensor so the detail level should at least be the same. I would think that you might need new flats as well as new bias frames. DSS needs a minimum of 8 stars to register the images so it is not always necessary to have 50 stars, as for stacking just go for average as this will give you the lowest noise unless you have twenty plus subs.

A.G

Link to comment
Share on other sites
ianpwilliams

ianpwilliams

Posted
  • Author
Posted

Hello, I'm glad to help. You are correct, I only used DSS and Gimp. As I mentioned, I usually flatten the gamma curve in DSS, save an intermediate result and process it later in Gimp. Below is my output of stacked subs that produced the previously shown result (only flattening of gamma applied, uncropped, resized to 1024x681).

autosave2_flattened_RGB-aligned_DSS_output_resized.jpg

Completely unmodified:

Autosave_unmodified_DSS_output_resized.jpg

Actually, You made me try again with my data - this time I played with DSS only: slightly lowered red component, saturation +18%, Dark 0, 100%, Mid 16, 42%, Light 30, 60% and voila:

M42, raw, 10+8 images, v2, resized.jpg

Image info file's in comment/despription (I hope).

Thanks, I'll try those DSS settings and see what happens. Then I can export modified and unmodified versions to compare.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
carastro

carastro

Posted
Posted
 what are my Flats? Are they Flat Files or Dark Flat files?

They are flat files.

Dark flats are darks the equivalent length of your flats.  I have never taken any and know hardly any-one who does, though there does seem to be some debate in whether you should or shouldn't.  I certainly wouldn't worry about them for now you have enough to cope with.

I'm also wondering if my flats are usable or not.

The best way to find out is to open your master flat (DSS will put a master into the folder where the flats came from), and use whatever post processing software you are using to stretch the flats.  They should show vignetting and dust bunnies if they have been done correctly.  

Carole 

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.