Recently Browsing 0 members
No registered users viewing this page.
After many hours of fiddling round with Registax wavelet settings to process my own solar system images, I've always been curious as to how it actually works. In doing so I've put together my own image sharpening program which does something similar to Registax wavelets. For comparison, I've also added some general purpose deconvolution techniques which you'll probably be familiar with from other image processing software (like Wiener inverse filtering, Richardson-Lucy, etc). In choosing a point spread function to deconvolve with, one suprising result was that the typical stack outputs from Autostakkert work best with a Lorentz point spread function (with a minor modification). Deconvolving with a Gaussian point spread function doesn't really work. Deep-sky images seem to deconvolve best with a Moffat point spread function (which is to be expected - it's already well established that star profiles in long exposures are best approximated with a Moffat function).
On the whole, it's unlikely that you can sharpen solar system images much more in this program than you already can in Registax. You can see results from Registax wavelet (sharpening layers), inverse filtering (e.g. Wiener), and iterative deconvolution (e.g. Landweber) below. They all give very similar results. In all the techniques there's a similar trade-off between less noise but less detail vs more noise but more detail.
There are some quick start notes on the first page of the Readme here:
There are some examples of deconvolved images here (move mouse over image to see before/after):
Image credits are on the hyperlinks
The Windows download is here:
Example solar system tifs to experiment with are here:
And the project page is here (with Source code in the src folder)
If anyone finds it useful, do post here how it compares to other tools you use for solar system image sharpening.
The download and the source code are free, you can use it unrestricted for any purpose. The OpenCV and OpenCVCSharp components which my program use have licence information at the end of the Readme.pdf.
I was out recently in what felt like the first clear sky in years and got ~109 min of data on M31, minus 76 frames due to a 12mph wind, which left me with 69 min of data (each shot is 45 sec with ISO 200 tracked with skywatcher star adventurer). As mentioned in the title I captured all these images in a bortal 8 location, used an unmodified canon eos 400d and the skywatcher 75ed as the scope (with a flattener). I've attached my edit (warning: it is not great at all + slightly overedited to see what details are even there), and to be my surprise it looked very similar to an image of M31 with only 20 min of data which i captured a month earlier (both of which i used DSS and photoshop for). Now this may well have something to do with the way i edited it in photoshop or a different setting in DSS or just the fact that 49 more data doesnt make much of a difference considering im in a bortal 8 location, maybe you guys could help on that. I've attached the link to the original files (in the folder called 18.2.2021) as well as the stacked image from DSS (https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/12NT4TmLCXvTfOXNPE_l8UWPRpgO2VjLe?usp=sharing). I didnt capture any flat images but have dark and bias frames, all in their correpsonding folders in the attached link. It would be greatly appreciated if you guys could see if there is more data in this then i have managed to 'extract' using photoshop. (If you use different software and try and edit these files please tell me what you used) If there isn't then maybe do you guys have any images of M31 (or similar) from very light polluted skies that you could share here? (If so i would if you could share the full exposure time and gear that would be great)
Hello all. I’ve tried a few times in the last month to image Mars but have had very little success. Although a decent size, Mars is very blurry and wobbly. I am fairly new to the hobby, but I would say it appears to be poor seeing conditions.
I am using a Celestron 6SE and Canon 600D. I have tried 2x and 3x Barlow. I focus using a bahtinov mask (on stars). I used movie crop mode on various ISOs and exposures, stacking at least 3000 frames (keeping the best 1%, 2%, 5%, etc).
Is Mars too far away now? Or am I underestimating how rarely you get a night of good seeing? How do you find out when the best seeing will be?
I would like to share my fourth image.
With my "lucky week" of imaging, along with M33, I managed to finish also this project. This is my longest integration to date.
These are IC 405 and IC 410, also known as the Flaming Star Nebula and the Tadpole Nebula, respectively, taken over 7 nights, under my Bortle 5/6 home sky.
Total integration time: 18h 29m 00s.
Here are the acquisition details:
Mount: Sky-Watcher NEQ6 Pro
Telescope: Tecnosky 80/480 APO FPL53 Triplet OWL Series
Camera: D5300 astromodified
Reducer/flattener: Tecnosky 4 elements, 0.8x
Guide-scope: Artesky UltraGuide 60mm f/4
Guide-camera: ZWO ASI 224MC
2020/11/18: Number of subs/Exposure time: 41@240s + 1@300s. Notes: L-Pro filter, no Moon
2020/11/21: Number of subs/Exposure time: 48@300s. Notes: L-Pro filter, Moon 46% illuminated
2020/11/24: Number of subs/Exposure time: 48@300s. Notes: L-Pro filter, Moon 75% illuminated
2020/12/07: Number of subs/Exposure time: 15@300s. Notes: L-Pro filter, no Moon
2020/12/13: Number of subs/Exposure time: 22@300s. Notes: L-Pro filter, no Moon
2021/01/10: Number of subs/Exposure time: 37@300s. Notes: L-Pro filter, no Moon
2021/01/11: Number of subs/Exposure time: 18@300s. Notes: L-Pro filter, no Moon
Total exposure time: 66540s = 18h 29m 00s.
Pre and post-processing: PixInsight 1.8.8-7.
This image was particularly hard to process, since there are many bright stars and stretching the nebulosity while taming the stars was quite difficult. I am sure I didn't manage it as well as I would have liked.
Here's a link to the full resolution image: Flaming Star Nebula (IC 405) and Tadpole Nebula (IC 410)
Thanks for looking!