Jump to content

Banner.jpg.b83b14cd4142fe10848741bb2a14c66b.jpg

Pixinsight

Galactic Wanderer

Recommended Posts

daz

daz

Posted
Posted

@Gina - Be careful with the Batch PreProcess script and Master calibrations... The standard ImageIntegration process behaves slightly differently and some of the FITS keywords that BPP needs are removed. If you use the raw set of calibration frames, BPP will create the master frames for you - you can then use these as Master frames in subsequent runs. If you do use II to create the master calibration files and then use them in BPP, you may see some purple warning messages in the process output...

As for the hubble pallette, no - but you would use PixelMath to do that. With the light frames open, you can build expressions to mix the data as you want.. It's very powerful!

Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • Replies 139
  • Created
  • Last Reply
Gina

Gina

Posted
Posted
On 03/09/2016 at 17:41, D4N said:

I find it best to use the batch pre processing script purely for image calibration.

Registration and integrations are then done with their respective processes.

Yes the BPP script suggests this - I'm just using the BBP to register and stack temporarily while I get the hang of PixInsight.  It will also give me an idea of how good the data is and whether I shall need to repeat it with different settings.  I'm still getting used to the new camera - it's very different from the astro CCDs I've been used to.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
D4N

D4N

Posted
Posted

The individual image registration, integration and drizzle integration processes are far more powerful than what is available in the BPP script.

But at least you are using it how it is meant to be used, just as a check.

PI is very good at getting rid of noise if you tweak the settings correctly in these processes.  I see a big difference when it comes to stretching data that has been integrated this way compared to data that was integrated in another package or with the BPP script.

Note that most of the noise rejection is off by default so unless you play with the settings it won't do so much.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Gina

Gina

Posted
Posted

Good :)  Looks like PI is going to do a far better job than DSS and Photoshop - I can see that PI has much greater and better control of image processing to reduce noise.  From the tutorials, I like the way it combines 3 colour images too.  Exciting stuff :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Jokehoba

Jokehoba

Posted
Posted
32 minutes ago, Gina said:

Good :)  Looks like PI is going to do a far better job than DSS and Photoshop - I can see that PI has much greater and better control of image processing to reduce noise.  From the tutorials, I like the way it combines 3 colour images too.  Exciting stuff :)

Welcome to the world of PixInsight processing! I've been using it for nearly 2 years. Had to change my workflow several times as I discovered new depths and ways of doing things, re-processing old data and discovering more detail. But be warned...it will draw you in and steal a great many hours of your life! :eek:

John

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Gina

Gina

Posted
Posted
16 hours ago, harry page said:

What the whole lot

You must be mad :)

 

Harry

I made a mistake - it was all the tutorials in the Newbies section I watched - not the lot!!  DOH - sorry.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
derrickf

derrickf

Posted
Posted
On 04/09/2016 at 09:24, Gina said:

A One point though - does PI have a Hubble Pallet process?  I've had a quick look through the menus and can't see it but with the huge amount of stuff there I could easily have missed it.

Others have suggested using pixelmath to create the initial Hubble palette image; once you have done so you could also consider using the Colormask Script to tweak the colours to your liking. See

http://pixinsight.com/forum/index.php?topic=7751.0

HTH

Link to comment
Share on other sites
MattJenko

MattJenko

Posted
Posted
2 hours ago, Gina said:

If I were to put the master calibration files (bias, dark and flat) on the SSD would it speed up PixInsight?  Would it be worth putting Light subs on SSD?

A lot of time in pre-processing is spent in writing the individual calibrated and registered frames to disk, so you could leave the lights on spinning disk, but write the intermediate files to SSD, so that is faster for both the write itself and also subsequent reads in later preprocessing stages.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
gnomus

gnomus

Posted
Posted

I cannot add very much except to say that a combination of Harry's Videos and the Light Vortex tutorials are my mainstay.  I have also seen the Warren Keller videos - these are very good.  Mr Keller has a book coming out later this month - https://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/product/3319256807/ref=oh_aui_detailpage_o04_s00?ie=UTF8&psc=1 - I have no idea if it will be any good, but I have ordered it based on the strength of his videos.

I used to use the Batch Preprocessing Script but I wanted to try to understand what was going on "under the hood", so I learned how to do them manually from the Light Vortex tutorials.  (I am so sad, I made myself up a 'Cheat Sheet' based on these tutorials.  Of course, once I had done my Master Bias, Darks and Flats this way, it really didn't take any time at all to do the Lights manually.  So this is now my usual way - it doesn't really take very long.  

The main difficulty I have with PI is that it is very easy to over-process (something that I have a tendency to do in any case) - so, when processing, I now have Mrs Gnomus sat next to me urging restraint.   

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Filroden

Filroden

Posted
Posted
4 hours ago, Marky1973 said:

Keen on getting that book myself but, be warned, it has been pit back twice since July!! Hopefully third time lucky!

Likewise. I saw the author's thread explaining the problems he had with the printers getting the right quality of images, hence the delay. I've refrained from pressing buy until I see a few reviews / see some preview pages (also hoping an Ebola version will be available - who has room for books?).

 

Edit: damn autocorrect with ebook to Ebola!

Link to comment
Share on other sites
wimvb

wimvb

Posted
Posted
48 minutes ago, gnomus said:

I cannot add very much except to say that a combination of Harry's Videos and the Light Vortex tutorials are my mainstay.  I have also seen the Warren Keller videos - these are very good.  Mr Keller has a book coming out later this month - https://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/product/3319256807/ref=oh_aui_detailpage_o04_s00?ie=UTF8&psc=1 - I have no idea if it will be any good, but I have ordered it based on the strength of his videos.

I used to use the Batch Preprocessing Script but I wanted to try to understand what was going on "under the hood", so I learned how to do them manually from the Light Vortex tutorials.  (I am so sad, I made myself up a 'Cheat Sheet' based on these tutorials.  Of course, once I had done my Master Bias, Darks and Flats this way, it really didn't take any time at all to do the Lights manually.  So this is now my usual way - it doesn't really take very long.  

The main difficulty I have with PI is that it is very easy to over-process (something that I have a tendency to do in any case) - so, when processing, I now have Mrs Gnomus sat next to me urging restraint.   

I took that route too. Now I've settled pretty much on doing calibration in BPP, with Bayer drizzle. Then do the registration and integration as separate processes.

PI is a power tool, and as such it's sometimes all too easy to overprocess images.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Marky1973

Marky1973

Posted
Posted
10 minutes ago, Gina said:

I make room for books - I like books :D

Definitely...although maybe not the Ebola version...

Sorry Filroden, I'm easily amused...

16 minutes ago, Filroden said:

Likewise. I saw the author's thread explaining the problems he had with the printers getting the right quality of images, hence the delay. I've refrained from pressing buy until I see a few reviews / see some preview pages (also hoping an Ebola version will be available - who has room for books?).

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
gnomus

gnomus

Posted
Posted
4 minutes ago, D4N said:

Thats the generate button for you, though I find it a pain to use that as you end up spending more time removing them from nebulous areas.

I think many folks reduce the samples per row down to 5 or 6 before hitting 'generate'.  He has it set at 30.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites
wimvb

wimvb

Posted
Posted

With DBE there seem to be two philosophies: few and large samples or more and smaller samples.

Juan Conejero (Mr PixInsight) advocates few samples per row so as not to pick up nebulosity as background.

On the other hand, in Alejandro Tombolinis examples, he can use a large number per row.

Whatever you choose, always keep and examine the background model. If that has some kind of structure or colour variation, you have most likely picked up nebulosity as background.

It's a tedious job examining, moving, resizing or deleting 400+ samples in an image. But in my experience, it pays off. Processing gets so much easier if you get rid of gradients.

http://wimvberlo.blogspot.se/2016/08/note-on-dynamic-background-extraction.html

Link to comment
Share on other sites
wimvb

wimvb

Posted
Posted
6 hours ago, Gina said:

I make room for books - I like books :D

 

6 hours ago, Marky1973 said:

Definitely...although maybe not the Ebola version...

 

Me three

 

1 hour ago, Andyb90 said:

What surprised me the most in the tutorial was the DBE applied to the Ha image of the Heart nebula. It's at around 33 mins in the video. The difference in contrast is significant.

Andy.

If you apply dbe to an image that does not have a gradient, you subtract a constant background. That should be equivalent to just moving the black point in a histogram, shouldn't it??

That would account for an increase in contrast. And besides, after dbe, an screen stretch is applied. But a screen stretch is dependent on what the image looks like. Doing a screen stretch after dbe will only appear to show more contrast. Contrast is really only determined once you do a permanent stretch.

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.