Batch processing with PI

[simmo39]

Hi all, I have been using PI for a few years now but have never attempted to use the batch processing script. My first question ( there may be a few here ) is, Im going to be using my OSC Cmos camera and when I stacked the long way I used dark flats as part of the processing. When using the batch script where do I drop them in? is it in the Bias section or the darks section and if its in the darks section how do I add the darks? ( again I have read that darks may not be needed with my ASI 2600mc but I have been using them when stacking the long way). 

I have watched a few tutorials on Batch processing script no seems to be answering my questions on cmos stacking.

This may be the first in a long line of questions so I apologize in advance!

[Ovi]

1 hour ago, simmo39 said:

Hi all, I have been using PI for a few years now but have never attempted to use the batch processing script. My first question ( there may be a few here ) is, Im going to be using my OSC Cmos camera and when I stacked the long way I used dark flats as part of the processing. When using the batch script where do I drop them in? is it in the Bias section or the darks section and if its in the darks section how do I add the darks? ( again I have read that darks may not be needed with my ASI 2600mc but I have been using them when stacking the long way). 

I have watched a few tutorials on Batch processing script no seems to be answering my questions on cmos stacking.

This may be the first in a long line of questions so I apologize in advance!

You add both the darks and dark flats in the darks section and they will be separated by exposure time. The script should automatically determine which is which (since the dark flats have the same exposure time as the flats and the darks have the same exposure time as the lights).

[simmo39]

1 hour ago, Ovi said:

You add both the darks and dark flats in the darks section and they will be separated by exposure time. The script should automatically determine which is which (since the dark flats have the same exposure time as the flats and the darks have the same exposure time as the lights).

Thank you, that seems to make sense.

[simmo39]

Think im doing something wrong here, I can get it to do the processing but it seems to take a lot longer to do than doing it as individual steps. Or have i got the wrong end of the stick about batch processing?

[scotty38]

Are you using the very latest WBPP? If so you may be doing far more in the script than you were doing manually, Local Normalisation for example and possibly other stuff depending on the quality setting you "may" have chosen. Just a thought......

[simmo39]

2 minutes ago, scotty38 said:

Are you using the very latest WBPP? If so you may be doing far more in the script than you were doing manually, Local Normalisation for example and possibly other stuff depending on the quality setting you "may" have chosen. Just a thought......

Thanks for the reply, I will have a quick look at that. I have to say I luv PI for the Image processing and I have got that to do more or less what I want it to do but this batch script is driving me up the wall! lol

[wimvb]

4 hours ago, simmo39 said:

Thanks for the reply, I will have a quick look at that. I have to say I luv PI for the Image processing and I have got that to do more or less what I want it to do but this batch script is driving me up the wall! lol

What computer do you use? I recently upgraded mine to one with Intel i9 processor, 32 MB RAM and 1 TB SSD, running Windows 11 Pro. It made a huge difference, but wbpp still takes a while to run.

[Lee_P]

I've got quite a powerful computer, but still factor WBPP running for over 20 hours to produce an integrated image. (Mind you, I'm stacking 600+ subframes). 

[simmo39]

11 hours ago, wimvb said:

What computer do you use? I recently upgraded mine to one with Intel i9 processor, 32 MB RAM and 1 TB SSD, running Windows 11 Pro. It made a huge difference, but wbpp still takes a while to run.

Hi Im using an HP with a i5 processor and only 8 MB of RAM, I think most of the problem is my settings. At the moment I think I will stick to doing the processing the old way, I seem to have better control of it and its quicker for me.

 

10 hours ago, Lee_P said:

I've got quite a powerful computer, but still factor WBPP running for over 20 hours to produce an integrated image. (Mind you, I'm stacking 600+ subframes). 

Yep I can only imagine that! When its a bit cooler I will have another go at WBPP but at the moment old way is best!  ( im a Luddite at heart. lol )

[scotty38]

1 hour ago, simmo39 said:

Hi Im using an HP with a i5 processor and only 8 MB of RAM, I think most of the problem is my settings. At the moment I think I will stick to doing the processing the old way, I seem to have better control of it and its quicker for me.

 

Yep I can only imagine that! When its a bit cooler I will have another go at WBPP but at the moment old way is best!  ( im a Luddite at heart. lol )

I hear what you're saying but just for info just in case you've not been keeping track but in the later releases of PI the ethos has changed such that WBPP is now the preferred way of preprocessing images. You may have noticed that the message that used to pop up that WBPP is suboptimal no longer appears. This is because the script has indeed been optimised and enhanced to (in theory) do a better job than going through the steps manually. That's not to say you should not do them manually or that you can't do a better job manually or that manually isn't quicker just that WBPP isn't the second rate option any longer 🙂

[simmo39]

19 minutes ago, scotty38 said:

I hear what you're saying but just for info just in case you've not been keeping track but in the later releases of PI the ethos has changed such that WBPP is now the preferred way of preprocessing images. You may have noticed that the message that used to pop up that WBPP is suboptimal no longer appears. This is because the script has indeed been optimised and enhanced to (in theory) do a better job than going through the steps manually. That's not to say you should not do them manually or that you can't do a better job manually or that manually isn't quicker just that WBPP isn't the second rate option any longer 🙂

I hear you, but at the moment it all seems to be a faf, I will get to use it I have no doubt but at the moment after trying a few times I cant say that Im that impressed with it, dont get me wrong I love PI and use it for everything but this WBPP seems a bit of a black art at the moment.

[scotty38]

Funny how different folk see it isn't it as, for me, I find it way easier than trying to fathom the individual processes....

[simmo39]

Just now, scotty38 said:

Funny how different folk see it isn't it as, for me, I find it way easier than trying to fathom the individual processes....

Yep it is, I remember the same thoughts when I started doing processing with PI but now wouldnt dream of using anything else. I will get on top of it sometime, dont think this weather is helping.

[wimvb]

As its name implies, it is the weight part of wbpp that makes it preferable to ”manual” pre-processing. But you can use subframe selector to create the weights. And if you use lrgb processing, you only need to do that for luminance. RGB is much more forgiving.

[simmo39]

Just an update, As the heat has gone and I can sit and play without cooking I have managed to get some old data to go through WBPP and it came out the other end ok. Im still thinking it takes longer than doing it manually ( i know its doing other good things to the data that I dont do ) but at least I now know I can use it. When my new season starts I will try it with fresh data and see what I get. Thanks for all the pointers.

[ampleamp]

Adam Block has had a lot to do with the development of WBPP and has a really good set of videos that he has made available on his Youtube channel https://www.youtube.com/c/AdamBlock/videos both mono and OSC, and includes cosmetic correction, normalisation, integration etc. Well worth as look.

Coming from an entirely manual approach with individual PI modules, i have now swopped entirely to WBPP, just press 'run' and walk away for an hour (usually around 200 frames of 12Mb)

[simmo39]

48 minutes ago, ampleamp said:

Adam Block has had a lot to do with the development of WBPP and has a really good set of videos that he has made available on his Youtube channel https://www.youtube.com/c/AdamBlock/videos both mono and OSC, and includes cosmetic correction, normalisation, integration etc. Well worth as look.

Coming from an entirely manual approach with individual PI modules, i have now swopped entirely to WBPP, just press 'run' and walk away for an hour (usually around 200 frames of 12Mb)

Hi and thanks for the pointer, I have just given one of the vids ( OSC with flat darks ) a watch and that helped a lot. I will follow this with the next set of new data I get ( hopefully in the next few weeks ).