Should I move to PixInsight?

[harry page]

1 hour ago, Midnight_lightning said:

Harry, they are great, and having downloaded the trial this morning I watched all the Novice ones again, this time  running my M31 data through them.

I did have an issue which I cant explain, don't know if you could help? Image below.

EDIT- JUST TRYING AGAIN AND LOOKING BETTER, MAYBE USER ERROR - WILL POST TOMORROW IF I SOLVE IT 

My M31 RGB showed a red bias when combined, I tried the Linear Fit but it didn't make any noticeable difference. So I processed through to Colour Calibration hoping something would fix it but it didn't. I have processed this data in Star Tools without issue so am not sure where I went wrong?

The videos are great though, meant I could quickly start getting to grips with PI.

Jon

 

 

Hi

Shout again if you need help

 

Harry

[Midnight_lightning]

It's not perfect but I have produced my first image in PI, massive thanks to Harry for his Newbie videos which I have followed today - I reckon I've spent 15 hours non-stop today, partly due to earlier issues which I suspect was user error - not sure what I did but perhaps loaded a wrong image into RGB combination. 

I also had problems in DBE where the DBE box was greyed out, I manged to un-grey it eventually but does anyone know how I did it because I don't ?

I'm quite happy with this as my first effort, and quite honestly using PI so far has been very enjoyable, not as daunting as I expected.

I will redo this next week and add in Lum and Ha

 

[wimvb]

That's a very good image of M31. 15 hours well spent.

[sloz1664]

I agree wholeheartedly, a really good image of M31. This is why we persevere and love this obsession hobby  

Steve

[Midnight_lightning]

2 hours ago, sloz1664 said:

I agree wholeheartedly, a really good image of M31. This is why we persevere and love this obsession hobby  

Steve

I think you had it right first time

[ollypenrice]

The OP mentions tricolour narrowband and HaLRGB.  Sara is a fine NB imager who works primarily in Ps. I work only in LRGB, sometimes with Ha and sometimes OIII added. All this blending I do in Ps CS3. However, I do use PI's DBE and SCNR green before fleeing into the sanity of Ps!

Rather than throw out value judgements I think it's more instructive to consider the PI/Ps differences. What has been called 'The Zone System' lies behind all successful post processing. This simply means that different zones within the image need different kinds of processing. PI and Ps agree on this. The key difference is that Ps is layers based and PI is masks based. So in Ps you can make a global modification to one layer, use a selection tool or simply your eyes and the eraser, and retain the modification only where you want it. In PI you will create a mask to exclude certain zones and modify the others. The underlying mathematics will not be all that different but the user interfaces are radically different. Some prefer one approach, some the other. I'm very 'touchy-feely' and visual, others are more mathematical. Ps suits me better but PI clearly suits others better.

I would say this though: the most enjoyable part of imaging, for me, is post processing so I think it's very important to enjoy the working environment of your chosen software.

Olly

[michael.h.f.wilkinson]

I have only recently joined in the DSO imaging fun, and have found APP very useful, and only tweak things afterwards in GIMP or AstroImageJ. I have tried my first blending of luminance with narrowband data on M57, and noted that APP has tools for that as well. I will need to experiment more, and with better data (just 800s of luminance, 510s H-alpha, and 720s O-III at an image scale that isn't big enough), but there is some functionality there.

[ollypenrice]

17 minutes ago, michael.h.f.wilkinson said:

I have only recently joined in the DSO imaging fun, and have found APP very useful, and only tweak things afterwards in GIMP or AstroImageJ. I have tried my first blending of luminance with narrowband data on M57, and noted that APP has tools for that as well. I will need to experiment more, and with better data (just 800s of luminance, 510s H-alpha, and 720s O-III at an image scale that isn't big enough), but there is some functionality there.

I'm not sure why you'd do this? (Add L to Ha and OIII.)

Olly

 

[michael.h.f.wilkinson]

1 hour ago, ollypenrice said:

The OP mentions tricolour narrowband and HaLRGB.  Sara is a fine NB imager who works primarily in Ps. I work only in LRGB, sometimes with Ha and sometimes OIII added. All this blending I do in Ps CS3. However, I do use PI's DBE and SCNR green before fleeing into the sanity of Ps!

Rather than throw out value judgements I think it's more instructive to consider the PI/Ps differences. What has been called 'The Zone System' lies behind all successful post processing. This simply means that different zones within the image need different kinds of processing. PI and Ps agree on this. The key difference is that Ps is layers based and PI is masks based. So in Ps you can make a global modification to one layer, use a selection tool or simply your eyes and the eraser, and retain the modification only where you want it. In PI you will create a mask to exclude certain zones and modify the others. The underlying mathematics will not be all that different but the user interfaces are radically different. Some prefer one approach, some the other. I'm very 'touchy-feely' and visual, others are more mathematical. Ps suits me better but PI clearly suits others better.

I would say this though: the most enjoyable part of imaging, for me, is post processing so I think it's very important to enjoy the working environment of your chosen software.

Olly

Interesting comparison of PS and PI. I aim at a third option, which I would call an adaptive approach, i.e. tools that automatically adapt processing to the local image content. Methods like (adaptive) unsharp masking, or anisotropic diffusion filtering fall into this category. It is definitely a more mathematical approach, ideally allowing far more automated processing. I rather enjoy designing that sort of software.

 

 

[ollypenrice]

1 minute ago, michael.h.f.wilkinson said:

Interesting comparison of PS and PI. I aim at a third option, which I would call an adaptive approach, i.e. tools that automatically adapt processing to the local image content. Methods like (adaptive) unsharp masking, or anisotropic diffusion filtering fall into this category. It is definitely a more mathematical approach, ideally allowing far more automated processing. I rather enjoy designing that sort of software.

 

 

More automation will certainly appeal to some, and be a rewarding challenge for the developer,  but I want to do it myself with generic rather than highly specific tools. That's the fun for me! Somewhere along the line we might end up creating the AP equivalent of the self-painting painting or the self-playing piano! 

Olly

[michael.h.f.wilkinson]

3 minutes ago, ollypenrice said:

I'm not sure why you'd do this? (Add L to Ha and OIII.)

Olly

 

I just testing my new filter wheel before clouds rushed in. RGB would have worked fine, but I didn't get round to testing that. The luminance actually shows a little bit of IC 1296

adding H-alpha as R and O-III as G and B at least adds some colour

Not bad for short integration time with my 80mm F/6 and ASI178MM uncooled planetary camera

[michael.h.f.wilkinson]

Just now, ollypenrice said:

More automation will certainly appeal to some, and be a rewarding challenge for the developer,  but I want to do it myself with generic rather than highly specific tools. That's the fun for me! Somewhere along the line we might end up creating the AP equivalent of the self-painting painting or the self-playing piano! 

Olly

You would always need to play around with parameters, and I always manually tweak curves. As you say, you should use tools you enjoy using (although I cannot imagine an imaging/image processing session without at least SOME swearing )

[ollypenrice]

Just now, michael.h.f.wilkinson said:

I just testing my new filter wheel before clouds rushed in. RGB would have worked fine, but I didn't get round to testing that. The luminance actually shows a little bit of IC 1296

adding H-alpha as R and O-III as G and B at least adds some colour

Not bad for short integration time with my 80mm F/6 and ASI178MM uncooled planetary camera

Understood.

I like adding Ha to red and OIII to G and B in an LRGB image using blend mode lighten in PS because it won't subdue any L or colour signal but only enhance it where it's brighter.

Olly

[ollypenrice]

3 minutes ago, michael.h.f.wilkinson said:

You would always need to play around with parameters, and I always manually tweak curves. As you say, you should use tools you enjoy using (although I cannot imagine an imaging/image processing session without at least SOME swearing )

Swearing is like integration time: the more the merrier - though for a real profanity fest the capture stage is the one to rely on...  USB connections, Windows updates, 237 kilometers of cable... what xould possibly go wrong?

Olly

[michael.h.f.wilkinson]

1 minute ago, ollypenrice said:

Understood.

I like adding Ha to red and OIII to G and B in an LRGB image using blend mode lighten in PS because it won't subdue any L or colour signal but only enhance it where it's brighter.

Olly

Which I suspect I would implement mathematically by to doing a pixel-wise maximum between Ha and R, or O-III and G/B respectively, after suitable normalisation of both images (you are doing some quite mathematical stuff, really )

[ollypenrice]

Just now, michael.h.f.wilkinson said:

Which I suspect I would implement mathematically by to doing a pixel-wise maximum between Ha and R, or O-III and G/B respectively, after suitable normalisation of both images (you are doing some quite mathematical stuff, really )

Oh yes, I know I'm relying on invisible mathematicians and bless them, I promise..

We need to unify this conversation!!! We're leap frogging.)

Olly

[michael.h.f.wilkinson]

1 minute ago, ollypenrice said:

Swearing is like integration time: the more the merrier - though for a real profanity fest the capture stage is the one to rely on...  USB connections, Windows updates, 237 kilometers of cable... what xould possibly go wrong?

Olly

You think you have problems? At least you don't have to set up the whole shebang, do polar alignment, connect all cables, cameras, batteries, guide scopes, etc., before clouds rush in

[michael.h.f.wilkinson]

Just now, ollypenrice said:

Oh yes, I know I'm relying on invisible mathematicians and bless them, I promise..

We need to unify this conversation!!! We're leap frogging.)

Olly

True

[Ouroboros]

23 hours ago, Grierson said:

As a Pixinsight novice can I just put a word in for Asto Dude’s 12 videos for absolute beginners. I havn’t the experience to say whether they are better or worse than others mentioned above but I am finding them very useful.

I'd like to second that.  His 12 introductory videos take you through the complete processing process. He's also very good at explaining the PI interface and how to use it. His tutorials are quite long and slow but I found that quite useful to watch while I'm processing an image of my own. The best way was to watch on tablet while processing on the PC. 

[poogle]

On 24/11/2018 at 10:46, Scooot said:

I started with PixInsight knowing nothing else, well almost nothing, so anything was going to be a steep learning curve. I like using it now, but I’m still learning. 

I’ve used many of the guides & tutorials already mentioned but the light vortex tutorials mostly, and found them to be extremely helpful. However I’ve recently discovered an unadviseble procedure in the light vortex calibration process, which is to pre-calibrate darks with the master bias. This link explains why it’s a “No No” and a better process, which you might find helpful  if you do decide use PixInsight to calibrate & integrate. 

https://pixinsight.com/forum/index.php?topic=11968.0

 

Found this thread by accident, and sorry for kind of hi-jacking it, but I wanted to direct a big thank you to @Scooot

I have been following the tutorials on Light Vortex, and they are excellent...but I was not aware of the above. Attaching a sample with and without bias calibrated darks.

To the left is a stack of images calibrated with a bias calibrated master dark, to the right is a stack calibrated with a master dark without bias calibration.

Thanks

/Patrik

[Midnight_lightning]

Hi WIm, yes did DBE. I have since used PCC and got much better colours.