Sequator vs. DSS

[8472]

In the realm of image stacking freeware, it seems that DSS seems to rule the roost. Just curious as to why Sequator doesn't seem to get much love, as it seems to do a similar job, but with less fuss and is far faster too? Plus no annoying 32bit limitations.

The only time I see it mentioned is for stacking with landscapes, but it seems to do the sky fine to me, or am I missing something?

[michael8554]

I use DSS on a 64 bit machine without problems?

Michael 

[8472]

1 hour ago, michael8554 said:

I use DSS on a 64 bit machine without problems?

Michael 

So do I, but it's not 64bit software, hence the occasional "out of memory" issues encountered by some users.

[michael8554]

Good point, hadn't come across that (so far!)

Michael 

[davew]

15 hours ago, 8472 said:

In the realm of image stacking freeware, it seems that DSS seems to rule the roost. Just curious as to why Sequator doesn't seem to get much love, as it seems to do a similar job, but with less fuss and is far faster too? Plus no annoying 32bit limitations.

The only time I see it mentioned is for stacking with landscapes, but it seems to do the sky fine to me, or am I missing something?

Doesn't seem to get much love ??  I'll have you know I've had a wild and not so secret affair with Sequator over a few months

I'm one of the people mentioning it for the landscape shots because that's what I do. I haven't used it for calibrating and stacking deep sky images because I haven't done such stuff in a while. I know the outlier reject works well as does the vignette control but I don't see any bias removal from the flats so I don't know exactly what it does. I keep my DSLR clean so don't have dust spots ( I'll eat those words  )  I've had very mixed results with light pollution reduction so never use it. I've also never used the dark subtraction so can't give an opinion on it.

I think the reason you aren't seeing it mentioned much is because it's fairly new and word hasn't got round. I'm so looking forward to hearing people complaining about it like they have about DSS over the years  !! This may all change as the word on the street is that DSS is going to be re written.

Dave.

[happy-kat]

Is DSO I'll use DSS

If a comet or asteroid I'll use DSD

If stars I'll use DSS

If stars with foreground I'll use Sequator.

[Mognet]

Downloaded a copy of Sequator last night to play with. It does seem quicker and easier to use than DSS. Now playing with the various options as I think I'll be using this in the future.

Comparing with my DSS processed image from this post it's come up with something more natural looking, and has even dealt with the light pollution/haze that the original had. All that was needed was some tinkering with the levels in Gimp (v2.10 rc1 as it handles the bit depth properly)

 

[8472]

2 hours ago, davew said:

Doesn't seem to get much love ??  I'll have you know I've had a wild and not so secret affair with Sequator over a few months

I'm one of the people mentioning it for the landscape shots because that's what I do. I haven't used it for calibrating and stacking deep sky images because I haven't done such stuff in a while. I know the outlier reject works well as does the vignette control but I don't see any bias removal from the flats so I don't know exactly what it does. I keep my DSLR clean so don't have dust spots ( I'll eat those words  )  I've had very mixed results with light pollution reduction so never use it. I've also never used the dark subtraction so can't give an opinion on it.

I think the reason you aren't seeing it mentioned much is because it's fairly new and word hasn't got round. I'm so looking forward to hearing people complaining about it like they have about DSS over the years  !! This may all change as the word on the street is that DSS is going to be re written.

Dave.

 I think the developer stated there's no bias frame option as they are taken from the darks or something like that (I don't understand it either). He also says it's not a direct replacement for DSS, just a easier to use alternative, or words to that effect. Incidentally, I have no affiliation with the program whatsoever. 

If it ever materializes, I'll be all over a recompiled 64bit DSS like a rash. 

[happy-kat]

Just did a test using my last stack and Sequator doesn't handle a lens with Chromatic Aberation as well as DSS.

 

[Mognet]

It seems to handle pincushion distortion ok when the option is turned on. I don't appear to have any files with chromatic aberration to see what happens there. Sequator uses libraw rather than dcraw, which DSS uses, so that could be the source. Their site doesn't say either way if aberration can be fixed

I did get it to crash when trying to use a master flat .tif from DSS. Seems happy using the raw files that were used to compile that though. Just costs a bit of extra time in processing

Looks like the only way to submit bug reports, etc is to email the developer directly. I'll drop him an email with the bug report and ask about chromatic aberration when I do

[JamesF]

10 hours ago, davew said:

I think the reason you aren't seeing it mentioned much is because it's fairly new and word hasn't got round. I'm so looking forward to hearing people complaining about it like they have about DSS over the years  !! This may all change as the word on the street is that DSS is going to be re written.

I'd not heard that DSS was going to be re-written, but work seems to be going on to make it properly 64-bit.

James

[happy-kat]

Please don't email the developer on my behalf, I was only putting pointing out that the processing of Sequator massively exaggerated chromatic aberration. Sequator has It's place and it's when there is foreground and for me it doesn't replace DSS for DSO or comet stacking.

[Mognet]

3 hours ago, happy-kat said:

Please don't email the developer on my behalf, I was only putting pointing out that the processing of Sequator massively exaggerated chromatic aberration. Sequator has It's place and it's when there is foreground and it doesn't replace DSS for DSO or comet stacking.

I didn't get round to sending him an email last night, but it looks like that part is out of his control

[wornish]

Late to this.  Only just discovered Sequator as I was following another thread on Milky Way processing ( Starry Landscapes).

I gave it a try on some of my deep sky images and I have to say its just as good as DSS  as far as I can see BUT it certainly is significantly quicker.

Doesn't take too long to learn the best settings either.

 

DSS development for those interested has actually restarted  and there is now a 64bit version. There is a thread on here that gives the details.

https://stargazerslounge.com/topic/312129-welcome-to-deepskystacker-410/

[michael.h.f.wilkinson]

Might have a go at Sequator if I combine stars and landscapes. I quite liked DSS, but have since moved to (non-free) APP.

[Richard Shagam]

As a newbie to astro photos, I've been using Sequator and find it to be fast and unfiddly.  For some reason, I haven't had much luck using DSS. I find DSS slow to load individual frames and results, whereas Seq just gets the job done so I can do some post processing in Gimp  It would be nice if Sequator had a feature like DSS, where you can check on/off files you want/don't want included in the stack.