M31 first meager attempt!

[lensman57]

Another thing I've noticed with PixInsight is that there are 32-bit and 64-bit versions, and the authors seem to consider the 32-bit version "obsolete". I had to download the 32-bit demo because I don't have a 64-bit computer, so would it be worth me buying the 32-bit version if I ended up deciding to buy the full version, knowing that it is not supported?

The 32 bit version will struggle on large files that need to have intensive processing as any 32 bit system can only address a max of 3 gig of ram. To make a proper use of the tools in PI you really do need an i3 core processor and 5 gig of ram as a minimum . I am using an i5 processor and 16 gig of ram on my laptop and it is at times a struggle with some of the tools if I am processing canon 1100d files. Keep the 32bit OS for image capture if appropriate and look at the 64 bit OS computers.

A.G

[ianpwilliams]

OK. Gets more expensive all the time this hobby...

[glowingturnip]

you're right, I didn't know that, I'm on 64 bit.

"The current versions 1.8.x of PixInsight are only available as 64-bit applications for all supported operating systems. Please note that no 32-bit versions will be released anymore. Note also that any existing 32-bit version will no longer be supported or updated."

I wouldn't pay the full price for an unsupported old version to be honest.  The Pixinsight team are strong on the development, and since I've had mine they've rolled out several cutting-edge tools that I've incorporated into my workflow, and you wouldn't want to miss out on that.

Having said that, the fee gets you a licence foir life, so when you get a 64 bit machine you could then download the latest versions onto that.

Maybe call them, see if you can cut a deal on the old 32 bit software  ;-)

[ianpwilliams]

Maybe! According to the website they are planning on releasing an updated version of the LE version, which will be cheaper (don't know if it'll be 32 or 64 bit though), so maybe they'll end up with full 64 bit, unsupported cheaper 32 bit, and cheaper still LE.

Regarding processing images, I always have to crop my images anyway because my scope and camera combination means that the targets are small, so I wondered if I could get away with the 32 bit one anyway. But like you say, it would be tough to pay full price for a version that is no longer supported or developed, even though I could switch to 64 bit later.

[happy-kat]

Iran download the 30 day trial of painshop pro x7 by Corel and you can use that and follow numerous Photoshop tutorials I just tried the ones by www.budgetastro.net. Psp also will run the gradient exterminator plugin and the hasta del a vista plugin.

[glowingturnip]

Regarding processing images, I always have to crop my images anyway because my scope and camera combination means that the targets are small, so I wondered if I could get away with the 32 bit one anyway.

doesn't work like that I'm afraid - the 64 bit they're referring to for the software releases is the size of the cpu registers and processing bus, not the bit depth of your images

[Thalestris24]

doesn't work like that I'm afraid - the 64 bit they're referring to for the software releases is the size of the cpu registers and processing bus, not the bit depth of your images

Well it's the operating system really

Louise

[ianpwilliams]

Ok I've followed Harry's PixInsight videos and had a go at my first M31. Clearly it's not as good as AG's, but it's a start. Any suggestions on how I could do it better would be most welcome.

I know I need to get rid of the band at the bottom (I'm assuming AG using Graient Xterminator to remove that).

And it looks like AG used a more intensive HDR wavelet treatment.

And I'm not sure how to get the same colour that AG has brought out.

[ianpwilliams]

Could anyone offer any constructive critism? And be brutal, its the only way I'll learn!

[ianpwilliams]

I've been asking for tips on the Pix forums, so I can hopefully get better at it. One person there processed my stack for me, but there seems to be the same level of noise in his version as in both of my versions, which AG appears to have managed to avoided. Which makes me wonder what it is I need to do to achieve similar results. I notice that AG also used Photoshop with plugins as part of the processing, which I don't have, so I wonder if that might have been what made the difference, and if so, could I do something similar in GIMP.