Best Registax Settings?

[cathouse42]

I find R6 works fine for me and use it all the time for wavelets and stacking my FD solar shots. Given the time Cor and the team have put in to provide this free software, some of the recent comments look a bit harsh to me. 

I find it hard to recommend or promote something that doesn't really work that well (or at all) for me.

I think they should spend some time for the next release, hiring a UX person on their team and a document writer.

[Freddie]

Given that 99.9% of the planetary images you will see on here have used Registax in the processing, I think it is a very useful item of software that people have gone to the trouble of developing and then making it freely available to us all to use. I am grateful for that.

[neil phillips]

Cor has spent many years helping us all with he's expertise. And giving he's time for free. While I have switched many functions to other software. I do still use it. And Cor will always have my gratitude for starting the ball rolling for all of us. agreed on that Freddie

[Space Cowboy]

There are countless tutorials online especially on YouTube. What do you expect for a free meal?

[cathouse42]

There are countless tutorials online especially on YouTube. What do you expect for a free meal?

A knife and a fork and maybe a spoon?

A plastic spork would even be useful

Look at GIMP, it was highly criticized early on, they HAD to listen to their users, eventually they did focus on usability and look at gimp now, it is actually usable now   Criticism is not a bad thing, ignore it at your pearl.  Free or not. There are alternatives popping up for this very reason, lack of listening. Eventually it will disappear and replaced by others. That is the natural selection cycle of applications.

[Freddie]

Well lets hope Cor doesn't dislike the criticism and remove Registax as I would like to know what the alternative to wavelets is knowing that 99.9% of planetary imagers use them. Given that their time is given for free and the only benefit they get is to know others are enjoying using their software, they do not HAVE to listen to their users, they may however choose to if they think their efforts are being appreciated. I guess not everyone is satisfied even when something is given to them free.

[si@nite]

I too have switched many functions to other software but still use R6 for some aspects of my processing & find the program very useful indeed, to be fair its not perfect but then what software  is paid or free!

[cathouse42]

Well lets hope Cor doesn't dislike the criticism and remove Registax as I would like to know what the alternative to wavelets is knowing that 99.9% of planetary imagers use them. Given that their time is given for free and the only benefit they get is to know others are enjoying using their software, they do not HAVE to listen to their users, they may however choose to if they think their efforts are being appreciated. I guess not everyone is satisfied even when something is given to them free.

Giving something free is not a free ticket to heaven.

If somebody cannot handle criticism, well, life must be hard.

[Zakalwe]

Well lets hope Cor doesn't dislike the criticism and remove Registax as I would like to know what the alternative to wavelets is knowing that 99.9% of planetary imagers use them. Given that their time is given for free and the only benefit they get is to know others are enjoying using their software, they do not HAVE to listen to their users, they may however choose to if they think their efforts are being appreciated. I guess not everyone is satisfied even when something is given to them free.

Lucy-Richardson deconvolution or Van Cittert de-convolution, to name two.

Astra Image (not free, but pretty cheap) is very good, either as the stand-alone program or as a Photoshop plug-in. The results are superior to wavelet sharpening:

Wavelet Sharpening in Registax 6 following stacking in AS!2

August 9th Quadrant and Proms

August 9th Mono Quadrant and Proms

Lucy-Richardson deconvolution in Astra Image following stacking in AS!2

August 9th Quadrant and Proms ReProcessed

August 9th Mono Quadrant and Proms ReProcessed

If you want a free version, then Image Post-Processer by Great Attractor is very, very fast and very powerful.

http://stargazerslounge.com/blog/1400/entry-1808-imppg-image-post-processor/

So whilst I am very grateful to Cor and his team for developing Registax, it's also fair to say that Regi 6 was a massive disappointment. It was harder to use than Regi 5 and gave, in a lot of cases, poorer results. Autostakkert has replaced it for the vast majority of planetary, Lunar and solar imagers. Time moves on and Regi 6 was pretty poor when it came out and it hasn't been developed in years. AS!2 is constantly undergoing revision, with the alpha and beta versions freely available. The de-Bayering routine that Regi uses has also been comprehensively superseded by the routines in AS!2 too as well. The differences are, I believe, stark.

One area that Regi 6 did advance on was the wavelet sharpening. However, this has, IMHO, been superseded by the deconvolution routines that I mention above.

Time moves on...you either keep up or get left behind. It doesn't matter if it's free or paid for. Registax was easier to use than AVIStack (remember that one?), now Autostakkert is easier and better than Regi.

[Space Cowboy]

I don't see the relavence of posting solar images in the planetary imaging forum.The processing techniques are very different. To me the wavelet solar images are over cooked which simply means the wavelets have not been used correctly.

[Stub Mandrel]

Astra Image 3.0 is free - there is a licence key on this page of their website.

http://www.phasespace.com.au/download.html

Will try and if good may upgrade.

[Zakalwe]

I don't see the relavence of posting solar images in the planetary imaging forum.The processing techniques are very different. To me the wavelet solar images are over cooked which simply means the wavelets have not been used correctly.

It was simply a demonstration of alternatives to wavelet processing.

[Stub Mandrel]

I've had a go of V3 of Astra Image. First impression is taht you can appluy much more aggressive sharpening, but I'm not convinced whether I'm seeing more detail or more noise.

[Space Cowboy]

It was simply a demonstration of alternatives to wavelet processing.

The tone of your post was "quit living in the past registax is yesterdays trash" together with a poor representation of wavelet processing on a solar image. This is very misleading especially for beginners who will ignore wavelets at their peril.

As Grandpa Willie used to say "A cat can have kittens in the oven but that don't make 'em biscuits"

[Zakalwe]

The tone of your post was "quit living in the past registax is yesterdays trash" together with a poor representation of wavelet processing on a solar image. This is very misleading especially for beginners who will ignore wavelets at their peril.

As Grandpa Willie used to say "A cat can have kittens in the oven but that don't make 'em biscuits"

Tone can be hard to convey in the written word. I don't recognise the interpretation that you are presenting though.

What is clear is that there have been advancements in stacking applications. AVIStack was last updated in 2010 (apart from a localisation update to French) and Registax in 2011). I would never recommend recommend Registax to a beginner for stacking. If you go back to Alexx's original post you can see why. It's just too complex, with too many manual steps and too many places to get lost in. Allied to the fact that there is no real manual for the application and there are many differing opinions on which setting works. In contrast, AS!2 is infinitely easier to use, is largely automated  and uses superior algorithms that produces better results. An avi can be stacked in AS!2 with 4 mouse clicks.

Regarding the "poor" representation, that was the best that I could do at the time with my limited skill level and the data that I had.  I re-processed it a couple of days later using Astra Image and was blown away at the difference. Now, either my skill level jumped up a notch, or I deliberately set out to deceive, or the deconvolution process delivers a better way to process the data.  You might be able to get a better result with wavelet processing, and if so I bow to your superior skills. I am always looking for the easiest, most efficient way to process data and for me, LR deconvolution wins hands down over wavelets. I don't think that it's misleading, just a statement of fact.

Grandpa Willie? I've no idea what to say to that, other than he's probably best cutting down on the moonshine intake a tad :grin:

The net:net of all this, is that there's usually a couple of different ways to get to similar end-points. I personally try and take the easiest most efficient way, others can differ. My recommendations to a beginner (and I consider myself a beginner):

• Take the best possible data. Concentrate on collimation and focus. Sacrifice gain for capture speed. Faster captures mean more frames to stack which will reduce the gain noise.
• Learn the histogram. A too-dark image is the prime cause of onion-ringing.
• Use Autostakkert for stacking. Don't touch Registx or AVIStack with a bargepole. If you absolutely must (and there's rarely a good reason for doing so) and you are using OSC data, then use the Firecapture de-Bayer program before stacking.
• On Lunar and solar aim to fill the image with alignment points. Use a AP size of about 50 and then just hit the "Place AP in Grid" button. Adjust the Min Bright scale to cover the image.
• On planetary, manually place the APs. Use an AP size of 25 and place multiple APs along the cloud bands (if imaging Jupe).
• On Lunar and Planetary drop the image into Registax for wavelet sharpening. Click the Dyadic button and use the first two sliders only. Do not touch slider 3.
• On solar, wavelets can produce a good image on discs. Follow the process above.
• On solar proms, wavelets are too coarse. Better results can be obtained using deconvolution routines.

HTH

[Space Cowboy]

I completely agree what you say regarding stacking. My point was purely based on wavelets. I certainly would not call you a beginner as your images are very good!

Dyadic wavelets are too coarse for solar sharpening so that explains to me why your Lucy Richardson processed image is nicer. There are a multitude of combinations to use in wavelets which does make them more complex but well worth experimenting. Personally I find Gaussian better for fine detail.

Emil states on the as!2 website that small ap boxes ie below 50 are not suitable for planets. Alignment cracks often result especially if seeing is not good.

There is no need to debayer OSC data before stacking in as!2 as it automatically stacks in colour.

As Grandpa Willie would say there is more than one way to skin a cat!

[Stub Mandrel]

Comparing sresults side by side, I'm not convinced astra is actuall giving me better results than registax with planetry images.

On the other hand, Astra has an amazing ability to 'polish' ordinary photos, I had a try with a shot of a bonfire taken at very high ISO and short exposure, it put loads of fine texture back into the flames.

[Freddie]

Yep, you'll struggle to find anyone producing quality planetary images who isn't using Regi.

[Stub Mandrel]

I'm going through several 2-minute captures of saturn, and putting each one through Astra and Registax. The raw stacks are looking better than I have got before, and both programmes improve them further. Registax gives a more 'natural' result and Astra seems to be more aggressive, and on the last run Astra picked up two dark bands around the n. hemisphere that weren't visible in Registax. Once I have got the absolute best images in each program, I'll do a compare posting.

[Space Cowboy]

Only 2 min captures? 6 min would be better for Saturn. You will struggle to avoid noise issues with such a short capture.

[Freddie]

Agree with Stuart there on the AVI duration. Saturn isn't really going to be a good target to use as a comparison as you will struggle to pull out much detail.

[Stub Mandrel]

Well as I haven't got a time machine, the results (of the two best 2 minutes) are here: http://stargazerslounge.com/topic/245149-saturn-last-night-registax-wavelets-vs-astra-deconvolution/