Processing software help

[Nova2000]

Ice saved for a decent astrophotography softwares. I use dss and am now bored of it. 

As I want to go deeper with my new setup on the way I need a good new processing software 

My options are

Pixinsight 

Nebulosity 

Maxim dl. 

OK so which of this software would you good astrophotographers suggest and why. 

And yes the software is for deep sky and not planetary. 

Please help this newbie

Thankyou 

 

[ronin]

Just to say that DSS is not image processing software. Whatever it can do is limited, basically so limited that the majority of people say that you use DSS to stack the images, get a stacked image or set of images then move these into image processing software.

Suppose the easy way to put it is: DSS = Deep Sky Stacker, not Deep Sky Imaging. What processing it can do is usually just ignored and from a few people it is actively suggested that you do not consdier any form of image processing in it.

All the image processing software seems sort of big and usually expensive and come with a significant learning curve. Most seem to go for Photoshop, but that costs. Then is GIMP - free but big and again a long learning process. There is one called IRIS, free and another called SIRIL, free. They seem to be smaller and so may be easier to get results from. But whichever you try I expect that it will be months or years to get the best out of anything. Some people use 3 or 4 different image processing packages in order to achieve the desired fnal result.

[Merlin66]

I'd recommend you have a good look at AstroArt. You can download a demo version to assess.

http://www.msb-astroart.com/down_en.htm

 

[D4N]

I have both Nebulosity and PI and can say they perform very different functions.

Nebulosity has a lot of image capture features such as sequences, auto stretch and FWHM focusing aid.  It is good at stacking although it's noise reduction options are less than in PI it does stack well.  It has some basic image manipulation tools but I use PI for this.

PI doesn't do image capture, it is purely image processing.  It is excellent at stacking and has superb processing features.  The main down side is it takes quite a bit of effort to learn how to use it.

Another advantage for both of these software packages is that they offer OSX support at no extra cost.

PI is also available for Linux.

[bottletopburly]

Startools is free to try, this gives the full version all that is missing is the ability to save final image  ,http://www.startools.org/downloads help and advice on the startools forum 

http://forum.startools.org/

[wimvb]

6 hours ago, D4N said:

I have both Nebulosity and PI and can say they perform very different functions.

Nebulosity has a lot of image capture features such as sequences, auto stretch and FWHM focusing aid.  It is good at stacking although it's noise reduction options are less than in PI it does stack well.  It has some basic image manipulation tools but I use PI for this.

PI doesn't do image capture, it is purely image processing.  It is excellent at stacking and has superb processing features.  The main down side is it takes quite a bit of effort to learn how to use it.

Another advantage for both of these software packages is that they offer OSX support at no extra cost.

PI is also available for Linux.

Well, actually, it does do image capture. But this functionality is still crude. You can connect an astrocam to PI, as long as it is supported by INDI. PI  has a very basic indi client. It is possible to capture an image directly into PI, and plate solve it. The next step in the client developement is to attach a pointing model to this. The PI INDI client also does basic mount control. I've used it with a raspberry pi running INDI server for both mount controll and image capture using my ASI 120MM.

As for image processing, PI has functionality that is hard to beat.

[Nova2000]

Which software will give me the best post processing and pre processing results?. Pixinsight seems interesting. 

[wimvb]

That depends on the driver, not the "car". I've seen masterpieces done with PS, and junk done with PI, and vice versa. The advantage of PI is that it includes stacking and other tools, so no need to save images and move between different software. This also guarantees that you have control over the entire process history, which makes it easier to undo and redo steps. That's the advantage if a one stop shop.

[SteveNickolls]

Hi Nova2000, thanks for your post. DSS is good for stacking (and it's free) but I wouldn't advise using it for subsequent processing. As for processing software it really comes down to your preference. Some of them can be trialed for free. I would add a +1 for StarTools (which you can try for free but not save any images). Ivo it's creator is a great guy and there is a support forum. Each software will come with its own learning phase and it will take you time to get proficient. Becoming capable with the processing software is an important step in improving your images just as much as the camera, telescope, mount you use and your local light pollution. Good luck.

Best regards,
Steve

 

[Astrofriend]

Hi,

I have used DSS earlier but now more Fitswork which is a free German software. You have more control of what you doing here compare to DSS and you can do some imageprocessing also.

 

Here is more information and a tutorial from me if you want to test it:

http://astrofriend.eu/astronomy/tutorials/tutorial-fitswork/tutorial-fitswork.html

 

Lately I have to start to use AstroImageJ:

http://astrofriend.eu/astronomy/tutorials/tutorial-astroimagej/tutorial-aij-01-introduction.html

It's also free and it's a 64 bit software and multiplatform. More difficult to understand but you can write your own plugins or macros.

 

/Lars

[ollypenrice]

On 08/12/2016 at 03:56, Nova2000 said:

Which software will give me the best post processing and pre processing results?. Pixinsight seems interesting. 

I stack and calibrate in AstroArt and have no plans to change that. It is superb. I post process in a combination of Pixisight and Photoshop and, again, will not be changing that soon!!!

Olly

[RichLD]

I capture in SGP, calibrate, align and stack in PI, then process using PI and PS. I change my workflow to suit the target but can always get what I want using the above.