Pixinsight issues?

[Demonperformer]

I know I am unreasonable, but there is so much good free software around for astro-imagers, I have a certain resentment about paying for software.

But a string of circumstances that have all arrived together is making me seriously consider Pixinsight. At €276 (including VAT) it isn't cheap, but I have been exploring a series of videos that show what it can do and, apart from making my coffee, it seems to cover just about everything that I can envision wanting.

But I have a very specific question for current users of PI: Is there anything about it that makes you wish you had not bought it?

Alternatively, if you tried the free trial period and then did not buy it, what was it that made you think it was not worth it?

Getting all the bad news up front will possibly persuade me out of it, or at least I will know what the potential issues might be before parting with my cash.

Thanks.

[Guest]

Hello there, I have the PIXINSIGHT and I am amazed from the software, did buy it years ago.. but today there are other softwares available, which you can also take in consideration like

the ASTRO PIXEL PROCESSOR

APP has 2 models for purcahsing the software, see yourself.. you can also try the software for 30 days for free.. I did start the TRIAL PERIOD yesterday and I am again amazed from the functionality of APP..

And to answer your question " Is there anything about it that makes you wish you had not bought it? " NO I would buy it again if I did not have one..

" what was it that made you think it was not worth it? " the fact  that PI did cover all needed functioins for Processing Astro Images and the big PI Community and updates provided by PI..

At the end of the day, everyone can/must/should decide if investing money for software is unreasonable, or reasonable..

Regards

Martin

[angryowl]

Is there anything about it that makes you wish you had not bought it?

No. In my experience it's worth every penny I spent on it and I do ALL of my image processing (linear and non-linear) on it. It has so many useful tools and the possibility of adding and developing scripts for it is also a bonus. The only other piece of software I use from time to time is Photoshop for manually tweaking star masks for difficult images.

 

[StuartJPP]

Why not try the software on trial if you haven't done so already?

Save the time for when you have collected some data that you want to put it through it's paces. I asked for an extension to my PI trial because of the limited amount of time we get to image and they were happy to do that (they may not these days but did in the past).

During the trial period, try free/cheaper software using the same data and see what produces the best result. Do this many times over using the same data and online tutorials. Each time you process the data set, you will get a slightly (or vastly) different outcome depending on what your workflow is but eventually you will peak and see what works for you.

Then after the trial period, if it does the job for you and you are happy with the results, is it then not worth the money?

Although I am like you and spending any money on software seems alien...people may spend just as much on a filter. I would say that using PixInsight (or similar) is like upgrading your mount/OTA/camera at a fraction of the cost. In my view it is certainly worth it, it will outlive most of your astronomy buys, especially if you are in the early stages of astrophotography.

 

[Tim]

1 hour ago, Demonperformer said:

Is there anything about it that makes you wish you had not bought it?

No. It was pretty amazing at first, and has gone from strength to strength. No other software comes close to its capabilities.

To help you get the best from it, check out Kayron Mercia's tutorials on lightvortexastronomy.

[James]

20 minutes ago, Tim said:

No. It was pretty amazing at first, and has gone from strength to strength. No other software comes close to its capabilities.

To help you get the best from it, check out Kayron Mercia's tutorials on lightvortexastronomy.

Seconded on all counts ... Kayrons tutorials have been invaluable to me, along with Harry Pages. Pixinsight has a bit of a learning curve but I think it's well worth the money spent

james

[Demonperformer]

Thanks everyone for the responses. Seems to be a fairly unanimous positive. 

I will take a look at APP.  I think to some extent it would depend on the support materials for it. Those for PI have struck me as pretty impressive, but it is good to get backup for that impression as well.

@StuartJPP I see what you are saying about the trial, but 1 of the circumstances in mentioned means that if I buy in the next month I can actually spread the cost over 12 months. If I buy after that I would need to pay for it all in one go. Hence looking for any negatives any current users have found - but there don't seem to be any!

Unless there are any packages that will make my coffee as well.

Thanks. 

[Demonperformer]

I have come across one minor problem with PI (before buying!).

It requires 4GB RAM and currently none of my machines have that much. However, I have a new laptop coming tomorrow as my 'capture' machine that does have 4GB, BUT I intend to keep that machine off the internet for security. However, the trial version of PI requires that it connect to the internet every time you use it. I have therefore fired off an enquiry on their website to see if a full licence also has this restrictive 'you must be internet-connected to use our software' policy.

Will keep you updated as/when I hear back.

Watch this space ....

[PeterCPC]

You don't have to be connected to the internet once you purchase it. Would I buy it again - no. I am now finding that APP is just what I wanted - not as complex as PI. However, I am sure that PI would be better if you are prepared to learn it all and use it to it's utmost. It's a huge learning curve.

Peter

[Ouroboros]

I'm a relative beginner at PI and haven't come across anything that would put me off. It is complicated and the learning curve is quite steep, but it is very rational in how it works, although not always intuitive. I'm relatively familiar with Photoshop for processing and I now realise the advantage of using software specifically designed for the job of processing astro images.  I still sometimes resort to using photoshop because it's more familiar, but I know that really PI has everything I need, and more. 

PS My problem is isn't the learning curve it's the forgetting curve which is even steeper!  

[Demonperformer]

Just been checking out the APP site a bit more and cannot see what the minimum system requirements are. Can anyone point me to a link (assuming that they do actually tell you what is requried!).

Thanks.

[PeterCPC]

Why not just download a trial version and try it out? The site says APP runs on Linux (RPM & DEB), Windows & MacOS 64bits Operating Systems.

Peter

[Demonperformer]

Yes, I know it says it can run on Windows, but that doesn't really answer the question. I bet it wouldn't run very well on my old Win98 machine which has just 960k of RAM.