Anyone use Registar?

[Droogie 2001]

I was following this You Tube video for some tips on improving my DSLR images (works with CCD's as well)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PZoCJBLAYEs&index=4&list=PLmtb8_jxQzzaKhtHZp1vbfDBUzGOS_8cs

Managed to download the extra bits of software I didn’t have however the one key piece is a bit of software called ‘Registar’

https://aurigaimaging.com/

I downloaded a trial which works aside from not allowing you to save the final image which for the purpose of the You Tube video means it is next to useless.

So I had a look at how much it was for the full version and it came out at $149 which is around a £100!

I appreciate it may have taken along to create and it appears to be well regarded but I cannot justify spending £100 on something I cannot properly test.

Has anyone got or used Registar? If so how can I be persuaded to stump up that kind of money?

Thanks

[Zakalwe]

Its a bit of a one trick pony, but it does that one trick very, very well.

Ask Olly...he's a big fan of Registar.

[damnut]

Registar is available on a trial basis after which you can purchase the full version. The cost is not outrageous for a superb piece of software, especially as you can get another free licence to run an additional copy on a different pc.. How much is your camera, scope or eyepiece??..

[Droogie 2001]

The version I have simply lets you see the star aligned results. I cannot then save that image and then process it in Photoshop. So in effect I cannot really see the results of what Registar can do, unless I missing something?

I don't mind spending money on software but as I cannot see any benefit from the trial I thought I would at least raise the point..

[Psychobilly]

Registars "real" trick is the ability to combine data from a whole range of different combinations of camera and scopes.. many moons ago SGL did a few collaborative images   using Registar to combine data from anyone who wanted to submit it...  It's also pretty useful for mosaic's with minimal overlaps between the panes...  If your not doing these things then theres not a lot of  point in buying it...

They have only recently brought out the 64 bit version...

Peter...

[ollypenrice]

Yes, this is the point. Registar is not a stacking programme, doesn't subtract darks or divide by flats. It's a multi scope, multi focal length, multi field curvature registration programme and lies behind some of the most famous astrophotos ever taken. It's good, but is it what you need? I couldn't live without it but that's me.

Olly

[steppenwolf]

Stunning piece of software - it only does one thing but boy does it do that one task well. I you need to combine images taken with disparate imaging systems, Registar is the answer.

[carastro]

Agree with Olly and Steve, I could not manage without it.  Having said that I do filter imaging, sometimes done on different nights and sometimes with different scopes or cameras and Registar matches the different images up so I can combine them.  

If however you are using a DSLR and taking images with the same telescope, then Registar probably won't be much use to you.  

HTH

Carole 

[Droogie 2001]

Thanks for everyone replies. I think Carole raises a interesting point. I have a DSLR at the moment though a CCD is on the cards in the next year. I have two scopes but both are different. A widefield Astrograph and a 8" SCT so I can't see any way of combining these. I guess after watching the video I was/ am interested in trying to maximise my post processing. Pretty every time I work on an image I improve my technic and learn new methods. I can afford the software but it would foolish to buy something I cannot make much use of. So I haven't ruled Registar out but I guess I am frustrated that the trial software does not offer any means of comparing or confirming it is going offer me much benefit.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Sp@ce_d]

I have to admit that in the couple of years I've been using pixinsight I've used registar less as pixinsight has become more capable in doing similar tasks (& more of course) within certain limitations. However I've also stopped combining my multi shooter dslr & CCD data as my setup has evolved which is why I got registar in the first place.. I still regard registar as king for what it does though,. As said above its a specific tool that is invaluable for its intended purpose. I should imagine combining wide field & longer FL would benefit greatly with registar & Olly would have the experience to advise how best to achieve this I'm sure. So from what you've said it's probably The tool to do the job but a very specific tool.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[ollypenrice]

I often combine higher resolution, long FL data with widefield but it is not a matter of giving it to the software and clicking. The greater the difference in resolution (call it focal length in practice) the more you have to decide on the opacity of the blend in order to make it look natural. You also need to bring the blend in smoothly, so having resized/recurvedthe high res overlay in Registar I do the 'arty' blending in Ps.

For example, a little of this image, which is itself a blend of 2.4 metre FL and 980 mm FL...

...is to be found in this one at just 530mm FL. But easy does it.

Olly

[ollypenrice]

OK, having watched Tony Hallas' video (which I thought was great and essential viewing for all DSLR users) I don't think you need Registar to get the same result. I would have thought that any software aligning on the starfield and then combining using Median-Mean or Sgma Reject would do the same job. When I stack in AstroArt I align using 'Star pattern, translation and rotation,' which is surely what Registar will do? You can, I think, ask for this alignment and stacking procedure from most astro software including, I guess, DSS.

Now I've found that AstroArt is not infallible at aligning three different colour channels in mono imaging. When it slips up I align my R,G and B in Registar. However, anyone following Tony Hallas with a DSLR will probably find that the alignment of such similar data will work fine in most packages.

What makes Registar special is that it does things the standard programmes won't do (though perhaps PI can also do?) such as co-register different field curvatures, different pixel sizes and different image scales. It can calibrate the disparate images fairly well as it does so and it can make mosaics. I have also found it infallible in terms of alignment precision and it is dead easy to use for this.

Olly

[Droogie 2001]

Thanks for everyone's comments and time taken to respond. It has given me a lot of ideas on how to progress. As Olly mentioned I may try the alignment algorithms on some other software apps first. Just to get a feel for what to expect. Some the other abilities of Registar are a bit out of imaging abilities and requirements at the moment. That said even if I just use if for one task and it gives me the results I want then I will buy it.

Thanks.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[wxsatuser]

Interesting Tony Hallas video.

I particularly like where he did the smoke thing, this should work on thin cloud/polution we get a lot of.

If anyone is interested I have been following Roger Clark's astro processing which is basically the same, using Camera RAW.

http://www.clarkvision.com/articles/astrophotography.image.processing/

[Zakalwe]

Thats a great tutorial- thank you for sharing it.

Could you not just use your standard stacking routine to stack? DSS should do what Tony Hallas is using Registar for, basically registering and stacking the frames. Or you cloud load them into a stack in Photoshop, choose Align Layers and then apply a median filter.